If India and Pakistan go at it

[Der_Trihs]

@silenus

Not hardly. India can absorb one hell of a lot more damage than Pakistan can. If it goes nuclear, Pakistan will be a glow-in-the-dark desert, while India will be back to current population levels within 10 years, with little drop in production.

After being hit with 60-100 nukes, aimed at cities ? That seems unlikely, especially the economic prediction.

[AK84]

@silenus

Not hardly. India can absorb one hell of a lot more damage than Pakistan can. If it goes nuclear, Pakistan will be a glow-in-the-dark desert, while India will be back to current population levels within 10 years, with little drop in production.

10 years, little drop in production? Tell me what are
you smoking and more importantly is there any left?:eek:

India will simply disintegrate, the 17 or so active insurgencys will (presuming that there little piece of real estate has not had the attentions of the Pakistan Airforce)
simply break away once there is no central government woth the name left. Other parts will be gobbled up.

There won’t be an India anymore. Or a Pakistan obviously.

[AK84]

@mswas

AK84 Do you really think the US is going to say, “Oh well, I guess we can’t fight Al Qaeda since we can’t get our material in there. Let’s just give up and go home.”?

The US will do its damdest to ensure that there is no war, as it did in 2002. Unfortunatky the US position is much weaker than then.
Prevention is better than cure.

There is no military in the world that can live without a supply line.

[Camus]

@AK84

The US will do its damdest to ensure that there is no war, as it did in 2002. Unfortunatky the US position is much weaker than then.
Prevention is better than cure.

There is no military in the world that can live without a supply line.

This is the same military that provided the primary foundation for the Berlin airlift. If there is enough political will, nearly all supplies could be airlifted. The main problems are financial cost, use of already thin air resources, and the inevitable delays and shortages this would create at the various outposts and bases.

[silenus]

If India gets off the first strike, or if Pakistan launches with its presumed level of efficiency, I stand by my statement. India has more nukes, better delivery systems, and a bunch more territory. Pakistan will vanish from history, while India will remain. Hurt, but intact. Pakistan couldn’t deliver 60 nukes via UPS, much less by missile. Plus, they have to assemble the nukes first, which takes time and if rushed, leads to things that don’t go “Bang.”

[AK84]

@silenus

If India gets off the first strike, or if Pakistan launches with its presumed level of efficiency, I stand by my statement. India has more nukes, better delivery systems, and a bunch more territory. Pakistan will vanish from history, while India will remain. Hurt, but intact. Pakistan couldn’t deliver 60 nukes via UPS, much less by missile. Plus, they have to assemble the nukes first, which takes time and if rushed, leads to things that don’t go “Bang.”

Pakistani delivery systems

Pakistan and weapons of mass destruction

Indian delivery systems

India and weapons of mass destruction

US officials estimation from last time the two nations had a showdown, apparently if Pakistan is UPS, India is TNT

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3340687/

Perhaps most important, the official said, is that Pakistan appears far more capable than India of delivering nuclear payloads. “I don’t think their [the Indian] program is as advanced as the Paks,” the official said, speaking particularly of ballistic missiles.

[silenus]

I sit corrected, although I still say the Pakistanis are toast. Not that I want either to get hit, but I still side with the Indians.

Maybe both sides will be rational.
Maybe pigs will fly.

[Much_poison]

That completely depends on who is in power. In a worst case scenario you have hindu nationalists vs. muslim radicals. In that case they are going to let fly for the holy sites, including Mecca, triggering unknown horrors in the wider world (think about the reaction to the vaporization of the holiest site of Islam for a second, then double it).

In a best case scenario cooler heads prevail and moderate elements within the Pakistani military and the Indian government actually manage to quell the tensions between the two nations. This has happened regularly in the past few years, but frankly the cards are on the table once again.

[AK84]

@Camus

This is the same military that provided the primary foundation for the Berlin airlift. If there is enough political will, nearly all supplies could be airlifted. The main problems are financial cost, use of already thin air resources, and the inevitable delays and shortages this would create at the various outposts and bases.

1. That military dose not exist anymore, and even in that case most of the goods were shipped to US bases in Europe and flown about 100 miles to Berlin. In this case we are talking about airlifting equipment from European bases 5000 miles to these forward areas and then bringing them in. At a time when US airlift capability is streched anyway.

2. The political will is there, it is the capability that is not.

[AK84]

@silenus

I sit corrected, although I still say the Pakistanis are toast. Not that I want either to get hit, but I still side with the Indians.

Maybe both sides will be rational.
Maybe pigs will fly.

You can of course side with whomever you wish. However personal likes and dislikes will not play a role here. Pakistanis are toast, so are Indians.

Of course the 800lb gorilla is China, they will be invariably sucked in, India might strike them after absorbing several stikes from Pakistan for instance.
I doubt a nuclear war will be contained.

[Rune]

Volatile India-Pakistan Standoff In 11,680th Day

[mswas]

@AK84

1. That military dose not exist anymore, and even in that case most of the goods were shipped to US bases in Europe and flown about 100 miles to Berlin. In this case we are talking about airlifting equipment from European bases 5000 miles to these forward areas and then bringing them in. At a time when US airlift capability is streched anyway.

2. The political will is there, it is the capability that is not.

If it came down to it, it would be airlifted from India. After all, we’re talking about a war against Pakistan where both India and the US are fighting them. There is a possibility that some kind of Faustian pact with China be thrown into the mix.

You talk about what is a practical reality at the moment but we are speaking of a pretty radical departure from what is occurring right now. If we can no longer depend on Pakistan in Afghanistan, that is a serious game changer, and I don’t expect the USG to simply give up and go home. At the very least India’s military would become a whole lot more advanced very rapidly.

[AK84]

Oh, and now we have Pakistan activly opposing the US. If that happens, the US will have far far far bigger worries than Afghanistan.

[mswas]

@AK84

Oh, and now we have Pakistan activly opposing the US. If that happens, the US will have far far far bigger worries than Afghanistan.

Well tell us what you think will happen if Pakistan removes all of its troops from the border region and no longer helps the US with its resupply of its forces in Afghanistan?

[mswas]

The Consequences of Nuclear Conflict between India and Pakistan

This is an NRDC study of the topic for anyone who is interested.

Scenario: 10 Bombs on 10 South Asian Cities

For our first scenario we used casualty data from the Hiroshima bomb to estimate what would happen if bombs exploded over 10 large South Asian cities: five in India and five in Pakistan. (The results were published in “The Risks and Consequences of Nuclear War in South Asia,” by NRDC physicist Matthew McKinzie and Princeton scientists Zia Mian, A. H. Nayyar and M. V. Ramana, a chapter in Smitu Kothari and Zia Mian (editors), “Out of the Nuclear Shadow” (Dehli: Lokayan and Rainbow Publishers, 2001).)

The 15-kiloton yield of the Hiroshima weapon is approximately the size of the weapons now in the Indian and Pakistani nuclear arsenals. The deaths and severe injuries experienced at Hiroshima were mainly a function of how far people were from ground zero. Other factors included whether people were in buildings or outdoors, the structural characteristics of the buildings themselves, and the age and health of the victims at the time of the attack. The closer to ground zero, the higher fatality rate. Further away there were fewer fatalities and larger numbers of injuries. The table below summarizes the first nuclear war scenario by superimposing the Hiroshima data onto five Indian and five Pakistan cities with densely concentrated populations.

[carnivorousplant]

@AK84

Of course the 800lb gorilla is China, they will be invariably sucked in, India might strike them after absorbing several stikes from Pakistan for instance.

Why would they do that? Sounds like getting into a fight with a guy at the bar and going after a spectator when you are losing.

[mswas]

Heh, I think if China came in on it they’d come in on India’s side, and give India the run of Kashmir in return for ceding a portion of their own disputed territory.

And with that, you have your overland route into Afghanistan for the US.

[lokij]

@AK84

Errr yea you are, if it was that simple, than those contingencys would have been used years ago. The issue is simple; sea power, three of those countries are land locked, Geogia has no direct links. Air lift capacity cannot provide but 1/100th of what sea based supply line dose. Right now the NATO supply line goes from Pakistani ports in Karachi, Omara, Gwader, Port Bin Qasim and Somani, up the Indus Highway, through the Khyabar Pass, into Afghanistan. The thousands of tonnes of materials that that supply line provides can never be replaced by airlift, even with the US air lift capability.

Those contingencies were used, extensively, up until 2005 when the Uzbeks asked us to leave due to a diplomatic issue. That situation has apparently been resolved. While I do acknowledge your point on the merits of sea based supply lines versus air based ones I don’t think we’re really talking about flying containers from Europe into the 'stans and loading the trucks there. There is no reason why we can’t ship right into Georgia by sea and use rail and cargo ships (via the Caspian) clear to Turkmenistan at the very least. Pakistan is useful but I would not say it is irreplaceable.

[even_sven]

@Der_Trihs

After being hit with 60-100 nukes, aimed at cities ? That seems unlikely, especially the economic prediction.

India has around 70 cities of over 500,000 people. More than 25 of those have more than a million people. I can’t find info on Pakistan’s nuclear range, but I imagine they’d have trouble hitting some of those. And the largest metro areas would need several nukes to even make a dent. Not to mention that despite this mass of urbanism, more than 70% of the population lives in rural areas that would be relatively untouched.

So even if somehow every city was destroyed, you’d still have a population twice that of the United States. Furthermore, the agricultural economy would not be as hard hit as it could be- many rural people’s lives would go on exactly the same even if all the cities evaporated tomorrow. Not that they could just shrug off a nuclear exchange, but it wouldn’t be as apocalyptic as it would be for Pakistan.

[carnivorousplant]

@even_sven

city was destroyed, you’d still have a population twice that of the United States. Furthermore, the agricultural economy would not be as hard hit as it could be- many rural people’s lives would go on exactly the same even if all the cities evaporated tomorrow. Not that they could just shrug off a nuclear exchange, but it wouldn’t be as apocalyptic as it would be for Pakistan.

What would be the effect of fallout on the rural areas and agriculture?