Jump to content

Now a war between India and Pakistan...


Pedro Pablo Laracuente
 Share

Recommended Posts

Pfft I'm not worried one bit if there's nuclear fallout anymore. I spend too much time in front of my computer that I think my cells are all mutated now and might give me some form of super powers (like in Mutant X).

Um Guys I noticed JJ got away lightly. What have you done to the real $ilk and Menchise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I wasn't trying to be easy or hard. I believe JJ's argument was overly simplistic and I decided to elaborate further. In it's original form, his argument is simply a statement, neither completely right or wrong. I simply expanded on the issue at hand - what is the separation of church and state, and what are it's limits?

I also pointed out that WE are following somewhat of a religious morality, while our enemies choose NOT to follow their morality of their religion.

Therefore the separation, is more extreme on the opposing side, contrary to JJ's stand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

/rp

*A beaten and bloody JJ crawls outta the debate room*

"i'm alive i made it!" /rp

well sorry menchise i'm gonna have to agree with silk on the church and state ideals

BACK TO THE WAR

The fact about how survivors will look back at how these two insignifigant countries united ww3...i have had it up to here with this Bullsh*t

they want kashmir let them have it...AFTER WE NUKE THE HELL OUTTA IT...this is ridiculous and out of hand....AND PEACKEEPERS don't even get me started...we should not have to send our boys and girls over there to stop these two small INSIGNIFIGANT countries from annhialating each other...what a waste of time.

silk, menchise, comments?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been following the developments ever since the parliament bombing or what have you, and from the beginning it has struck me as that India is using the United State's ideals that we put forth in Afghanistan to forward their own agenda.

If we step in it will simply appear hypocritical, and I believe you won't see us step in, because when Israel did the same thing that India is doing now, we said NOTHING contrary to what Israel's position was. That's been the first time we haven't critisized Israel's actions, and Arafat is about to crap himself after realizing we won't step in.

I would rather we simply mediate if necessary through the use of diplomatic channels, but if Pakistan decides to drop nukes, India has the right to respond in kind, and we should sit back and let them. I'm not for getting involved, we have NO right to be involved in that situation after taking the stance we have chosen under president Bush.

Either way, our war against terrorism will continue, with or without a coalition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then you have the UN to deal with too $ilk.

I know the UN is a joke, but when it comes to something as serious as a nuke being used... it WILL step in. And it will get ugly.

Just look what happened when a mere oil was in the line.. you got an entire multinational force ganging on Iraq. Now think what the UN will muster when the nukes begin flying over there and f*cking up the atmosphere of the most populated nations of Earth.

Heck, the Chinese themselves would probably use it as an excuse to annex more land. And I wouldnt blame them either. Nobody likes a neighbor sprinkling radiation over your borders eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i gotta go with tac on this one....personally let the chineese annex both those damn countries if it prevents a nuclear war...

i will not have these two insignifigant countries spill eachothers blood or use nuclear weapons on eachother for a piece of ---- rock known as KASHMIR which 80 percent of the world doesen't even know exists!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let China take those two countries, and they aren't all that far from our Mid East oil fields.

I'd rather not have Commies that close.

That would automatically also make them a more immediate threat to Russia, increases the possibility they could push into Africa, also how would the South Koreans, Vietnam, and Taiwan react to these agressions? They would also be a threat to the Ukraine, and could shut off Russias main resources.

All for the price of letting them have two countries look what comes of it. I'd rather let India and Pakistan nuke whatever they want to. (As long as it's not us).

The UN is a joke, and has no power over them. The USA IS the UN as far as it's military goes. And I doubt we'd worry too much about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

now we got a debate going

yes i would like china to have those two countries....

first off even though i don't specifically agree with chineese government philosophy..they would be able to keep some sort of order in those regions, an plus the fact they are very much against islamic hardline militants due to the fact that they are having trouble with al qaeda like radicals in their own countries.

Now silk you and i know both know china would not be able to push into russia... for multiple reasons.

China does not have the economy to fund a war against Russia on such a large scale, climbing mountains and harsh terrain in btwn their borders, plus Russia and the US have lately become good allies....and Russia has become much more involved as of late in NATO affairs.

Expanding into Africa....why the hell would they want any part of African affairs...first off they would have to deal with aids, epidemics, straining their economy to support lesser advanced coutnries..the fact of moving the resources long distances OVER LAND..the PLAN(people's liberation army navy) does not have anywhere close to the resources to move the people required for an operation of that source across water. Also would china be willing to pay the HIGH blood price for an inch of african soil. Not only would they have to deal with government forces, but also with local militia, and guerrilas?

THERE wow my frist real debate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright JJ, the reason I point out certain things, China IS suffering. A move into India and Pakistan would place them immediately on the frontier of the Caucasas, one of the riches natural areas on earth. To top it off, it's undefended and Russia has no way to fund their own military. If China was hurting bad enough, that's where they'd move.

As far as Africa, considering it would give them near total control of the Indian Ocean, as well as put their military within striking distance of both:

1. our only bases in the region

2. the middle east oil fields, another rich natural resource.

These countries couldn't win against China. By giving China Pakistan and India, all they are going to do is the same thing Hitler did when Chamberlain gave him part of Czechoslovakia.

The Chinese are going to say "oh stupid round-eyes have given us the okay to move ahead on our territorial conquests."

I'd rather keep China contained AND hurting rather than letting them spread into these areas where they are more of a threat.

That's simply my opinion, as I have no official position really on the India Pakistan conflict. I don't care what happens one way or the other, so long as the interests of the USA are met.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<---Saddam & Laden's view on the pakistan/india issue. Its taking the attention off them.

Besides, what's to worry. They wont push the button, each side knows the moment they push it, they both lose. Big time.

[ 12-29-2001: Message edited by: Tac ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Besides, what's to worry. They wont push the button, each side knows the moment they push it, they both lose. Big time.

To start, i'm operating under the military figures that started this topic.

If India is that superior in the number of conventional forces, and assuming that they are better trained, Pakistan will lose/start to lose a conventional war. If the Pakistani government/military knows they are going to lose power since India is invading almost uncontested, they really aren't going to care if they all die, since they will probably THINK that the Indian troops are going to kill them anyway (or at least take away their power)

Give India and Pakistan to China? ARE YOU ******* *crazy*?!?!?!? Instead of them nuking each other, you want them to nuke China? China has a FEW more nukes than India+Pakistan, and they have much longer range missiles to deliver them on. Not to mention, even if you get past the fact that India and Pakistan would rather nuke THEMSELVES before being handed over to Chinese rule (you all do realize China does NOT support their religion, right?), you need to look at the fact that even though China is changing, it's previous internation relations with the US were a lot less than good, it's government is totalitarian, it carries out human rights abuses, your going to be adding millions upon millions of people under a government that wont know how to deal with them that's not stable to begin with, and THEN asking the government to support them and keep order. You'll probably have the fragmentation of China by the end of it, assuming that there isnt some sort of nuclear exchange first. Oh yeah, and even if none of what I just said would happen, China would gain so much power from expanding into that region that it'd destabilize the region (the current hedgemonies in the region are Russia and the United States, neither of which would be pleased with CHINA moving in, having probably the 2nd or 3rd most powerful military in the world)

So, hope that there isn't a full scale war between India and Pakistan. And hope that no one is going to let CHINA have India and Pakistan. Be better if they both nuked each other to hell. At least that way no one will WANT the land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

okay silk you might be right about he caucuases...but what i said before russia would not alone have to defend her borders...due to an increasing of russian involvement in NATO affairs, and vice versa. Second they would not have the economy to move on africa...or the ability to fight a bloody guerrila war...while dealing with increasing pressure from the UN aka US and European Allies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much of what China would want is undefended pretty much. Even if China doesn't stand alone, I somehow doubt that the PC European powers will band together to fight a trade partner.

Russia doesn't have the same support that we enjoy.

As far as Africa, it's just a thought considering they need only pacify a small region of Africa to have striking power against our fleet in the Indian Ocean. The Middle East oil fields would look mighty tasty to.

Just a few thoughts before we hand over some land to "appease" the enemy.

Remember Chamberlain and Czechoslavakia.

The Chinese have already stated that they are willing to wait until it's possible for them to conquer the world.

Putting them in a position to make it easier isn't good at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Tac:

Besides, what's to worry. They wont push the button, each side knows the moment they push it, they both lose. Big time.


I basically agree and defintely hope that you're right. The fact is that any kind of nuclear engagement anywhere in the world would not and could not be a local affair. India and Pakistan both, hopefully, are aware of this. When the smoke clears it won't matter who was the aggressor or who has more people left. Not only will they have nearly (if not completely) annihilated eachother, but they'll have to face the rest of the world the day after.

As for my opinion... no, I don't think they should be allowed to sit there and toss nukes until the other one is gone. Nuclear weapons are the ultimate in civilian warfare, every one kills a countless number of innocent. Militarily they serve no purpose except to either force your enemy into surrender (which won't happen) or completely destroy every shred of life in your opponent's country (which very likely would happen in an engagement between these two). There's no reason to let these two governments willingly kill such a huge percentage of their populations.

This doesn't mean that I'm in favor of sending US troops over there to "keep the peace" - it's not worth that much to us (although, arguably, a nuclear engagement anywhere is a matter of serious national interest to us). But I do think that we (along with countries in the region) should do everything within our diplomatic power to stop a fight from breaking out.

[ 12-29-2001: Message edited by: Simparadox ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

okay silk here i come time to hit you back!

"appeasemnt is what a man feeds a tiger in hopes it will eat him last"

First off this isn't a form of appeasement this is a form of contorl...secondly this "Mulitcontinental Chinnese Empire" would require mass troops (which yes the chineese have) spreading their force concentration.....

Napoleon and Hitler did the same thing....and then they made the wrong push against guess who...The Russians...the russians are a very strong vigilant warring people...they use a policy of scorched earth..and every mile they give is paid for heavily in the invaders blood...the chinnese would be fools! to even consider moving against them history has proven this and with the battle lines being so big! Think about it silk...having to a fight a war on a giant russian wilderness front...then the us decides to join in and get some ....and having to defend another attack from the REAR!!! LETS NOT FORGET HOW MUCH THE CHINEESE ARE HATED BY ISLAMIC TERRORIST GROUPS TOO! Plus you've got militant groups in Africa running round too...i think they would find it difficult to control india and pakistan alone...let alone africa...and ENRAGED russian people in the caucauses

This isn't a form of appeasement this a form of HAVING some sort of control in a troubled region

Oh and striking our bases!! HAHAHAH don't make me laugh Silk Chinnese Air power is CRAP....the PLAAF is a crap airforce, one of their main stays fighter is the J-7E fishbed, a vietnam era fighter which sucked backed then and sucked now...and withforces in that region already on threatcon delta (highest level of security) there planes won't even get close enough...well close enough to get there ass kicked!.

ANOTHER THING ABOUT RUSSIA: the 20 year non agression pact just signed..ended alot of the little tank skirmishes over there (Your not supposed to know about

[ 12-29-2001: Message edited by: JJ ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Chinese do not stand a signifigant threat to us or our allies at this point. If we were to allow them to get situated in a tactically superior situation that would be, quite frankly - stupid. To put it bluntly.

If we allow them the opportunity to be a threat, they can and will be. They don't stand a chance against us technologically, but I'm willing to bet they would kick the ass of every single one of our allies in the middle east.

And I'm also willing to bet that our "allies" in Nato would not join us in an effort to contain China UNTIL it became a threat to them as well.

I stand by the position that diplomatically we should tone down the conflict in India and Pakistan, and leave our forces out of it. If China invades for some stupid reason, we should arm Pakistani's and Indian's. China can become a serious threat in the next 10 to 20 years, even faster if we allow them free reign to TAKE the resources they need.

The "scorched-earth" policy of the Soviet Union was forced upon the people by a Socialist Dictator. It wasn't their willpower, it was their fear of being executed that caused them to fight for the "motherland". If Germany invaded Russia today, Russia would fold. Keep in mind that Hitler was fighting a multi-front war as well, against many nations. If China invaded Russia, it would do so unopposed.

quote:

This isn't a form of appeasement this a form of HAVING some sort of control in a troubled region

How can you not define giving over our supposed allies to an enemy without a word of protest as appeasement?

The best thing to happen would be for India and Pakistan to drop nukes on each other, and let China invade, causing India and Pakistan to nuke China.

That would be cool.

Sorry I'm not in the debating spirit, I'm just pointing out missing things in your argument. Like I said, I have no personal policy on the matter, I'm just stating what would likely come of such a move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JJ,

I feel that you are overly optimistic on the abilties of the Russian states to succesfully repel an invasion attempt by the Chinese.While it is true that no modern army has been able to push into the interior of Mother Russia,most of those attempts have come from the european front where the stalwart Russian people were aided by not only that hellish Russian winter but also by the Ural mountains.

Russia HAS been taken though...by the mongol hordes of Ghengis Khan...riding ponies.....FROM the CHINA region...if they had that front coupled with the India and Pakistani territories, I think the Russian States would be hard pressed to defend against Chinese incursion ...especially in the Eastern regions including Siberia...lot's of untapped resources there.....We don't even want to think about letting this domino effect start!!!

as for the table of organization of the Indian and Pakistani militaries go. sometimes numbers can be deceiving...alot would depend on how those assets have been trained and how they are used.

and the nukes...the real question with them isn't number..but payload.What are they playing with. Are we talking some thing on par with Hiroshima, which was like 13 kilotons.Or do they have weapons closer to what we are fielding....I don't belive they do, but I don't know for sure...if they are fielding warheads 100 Kilotons and up it would definately effect countries outside their own region. In which case the U.N. would be forced to try and take some action....has anybody read or know anything about their nuclear payloads and delivery systems?

[ 01-01-2002: Message edited by: Stormshadow ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

okay silk i'm gonna have to agree with you on having pakistan and india nuke eachother silly then having them invade.

The scorched earth policy may have been forced upon them by the socialist dicator in the 1940's, but remember they used the same thing in the early 1800's against napoleon's grand army, when russia was ruled by a king and parliment,commie rev wasn't until 1917.

Stormshadow i think u underestimate the will of the russian troops/people...if china wanted to maintain a war against russia, they would need to deal with russian winters too......and it's been scientifcally proven that the russian soldier excels at winter combat, another reason is that the russian and chineese have the exact same doctine on armor warfare...don't repair tanks, overwhelm them. Russia has many (yes maybe of lower quality) more tanks than China.They also have the manpower to staff them....china's main power is in it's infantry...armor vs infantry? thats a no brainer...plus china uses the type 80 ak47 model ...which is a smaller pos model, while russia uses the classic ak74..the one designed by kalashnikov himself. Special Forces: Russians Spetznaz are some of the top trained troops in the world, many are left over from the days of the KGB , so they are experienced, and HARDCORE.

I vote we change the debate to Russia VS China who would win?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think economy wise, regardless of the victor, Russia would lose as it would revert over to another system, possibly even communism. We don't know what effects a Communist incursion into Russia would entail as far as Communist uprisings in Russia. I would be worried about a Civil War more than anything else. China's main power from what I've seen is it's artillery. It's older versions of what we have, but they have enough of it to compete with even US.

I would like to point out the underpayed, underequipped Russian military, versus a gigantic, perhaps less-equipped enemy.

We didn't have the manpower to defeat them in Korea, even though we inflicted heavier losses on them, sheer numbers - even unarmed Chinese, forced us to retreat. China's advantage is sheer manpower + better artillery than Russia. Russia's tanks are nice, but let's not forget that they haven't had the money to build and fuel more than a few prototypes of any new weapon they come out with.

Russia built a plane last year that was supposed to be on par with our new F22, unfortunately they could only afford enough fuel for like 1 test run, and now a year later it sits on the ground, unfueled.

The Russian economy, plus weakened internal affairs would make Russia lose in the long run even if they were able to push the Chinese back.

Those areas in Russia the Chinese would need to capture are sparsely populated, and have little to no defenses in place.

I'm going to go with the position, that if no one decided to help Russia out, Russia would lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if we must have a debate about it, who is going to want to pick a fight with China? Russia would be on it's own throughout this, and even if by the smallest chance a decent ally joins Russia, Russia's economy would collapse and in the end, Russia still loses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an interesting debate, but it would NEVER happen. Russia would NOT be on it's own, and China would NOT attack Russia. It's a fools mission.

China attacks Russia, China gets CUT OFF, without foreign investment, factories manufacturing etc, China goes DOWN BIG TIME!!

We would ally ourselves with the Russians, we would NEVER allow the communists to come back in power there. Also, Russia is still a HUGE nuclear power, if China ever attacked them, they would glow in the dark. Artillery and infantry are wonderful, but up against nukes, it's a fools errand.

my 2 cents, and probably worth as much!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Jaguar:

This is an interesting debate, but it would NEVER happen. Russia would NOT be on it's own, and China would NOT attack Russia. It's a fools mission.

China attacks Russia, China gets CUT OFF, without foreign investment, factories manufacturing etc, China goes DOWN BIG TIME!!

We would ally ourselves with the Russians, we would NEVER allow the communists to come back in power there. Also, Russia is still a HUGE nuclear power, if China ever attacked them, they would glow in the dark. Artillery and infantry are wonderful, but up against nukes, it's a fools errand.

my 2 cents, and probably worth as much!!

You forget, or at least seem to, that China is a nuclear power as well. Any kind of nuclear engagement anywhere in the world, especially in Asia, would be BAD. And it'd be way beyond bad if said engagement was between China and Russia. Nuclear weapons aren't meant to be taken lightly. As a matter of fact, I heard just today a nuclear war between India and Pakistan would result in close to one million deaths just on the Indian side. It's not worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then we are in agreement on that point...those States that were formerly the U.S.S.R. probably could not stand against a conventional Full scale Chinese offensive. Another key factor I think would be a lack of centralized Command and Control.Not to mention the number of madmen over there who would see an opportunity to seize power for themselves. If China hit them hard at the beginning of the conflict, ie. a Blitzkrieg type offensive, someone over there might panic and hit the big red button.....and the Russian's have some serious nuclear warheads and delivery assets......all the makings of a global catastrophe.

quote:

.don't repair tanks, overwhelm them. Russia has many (yes maybe of lower quality) more tanks than China.They also have the manpower to staff them....china's main power is in it's infantry...armor vs infantry? thats a no brainer..

The Russian States may have more Tanks than the Chinese but I question their Technical and logistical support in the field....I don't think they could keep them in the battle.

I'm not sure what you mean by "Armor vs. Infantry ,that's a no-brainer", Because such is not the case....This isn't Axis & Allies....unsupported Armor is cannon fodder to a well trained and supplied light Infantry. especially an Infantry with heavy Artillery support.

The Russian military doctrine of the broad assault front using the Motorized Rifle Regiment in an on-line assault in an attempt to envelope the enemy will not work against the Chinese because the Russians can't maintain a broad enough front to keep from getting enveloped themselves.

case in point about the Infantry. While I was in the Army, The only unit to EVER fight the OPFOR forces at FT. Irwin,The National Training Center for Desert Warfare, to a stand still was a U.S. Ranger Battalion....with the 10th Mountain coming close...both of these are light Infantry units....and that is an impressive feat since those OPFOR guys have their $hit together ,because they do it everyday and they know the Area of Operation like it was their own backyard....essentially it was.

quote:

plus china uses the type 80 ak47 model ...which is a smaller pos model, while russia uses the classic ak74..the one designed by kalashnikov himself.

In this type of engagement the diference in quality between the Russian AK and the Chicom AK is of no great matter.....they both put hot steel down range ..... the golden BB theory is in effect ... lol

as for the Spetznaz, yes they are hardcore and well trained...I just don't know how effective they would be against the Chinese.... and once again we run into those Command and Control and logistics issues....both of which are needed to run successful covert-op missions....using the Spetznaz for anything else would be a waste.

It would indeed be interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...