-The overall imbalance of capabilities cannot be ignored. India is much stronger militarily, economically and has great cohesion in population ( a few elements aside). Pakistan lacks all this, majorly. Add to that the fact that globally, India stands a much better chance to gather support than Pakistan.
I’ll grant you the point that Pakistan will cause lot of damage to India too. If there’s a war, we will also lose thousands of soldiers, civilians, infrastructure and arms and eqpt. So why do that when we can cause the devastation without firing a single bullet ?
Let’s say being on alert is a like an ailment and requires very costly medical care. India can afford it for few years but Pakistan can barely survive couple of months. So why would I start a fight when I can damage the enemy decisively, by just waiting it out ?
But military action will happen, that’s also certain. It’ll happen when the morale and capability of Pakistan will be greatly diminished ensuring that India has least resistance and casualties / damage.
It’s good planning. Pakistan and its friends in India won’t like it and keep taunting Modi - what happened ..why don’t you attack ..so much noise and no action ?
But that’s okay. A trait of being a larger person and bigger power is not getting daunted by sniggering weaklings. India will attack the way it suits us, when it suits us and where it suits it.
India is going for siege warfare tactics this time. We won’t charge your fort blindly. We will dry you out, famine you out, bankrupt you, ensure your bowmen standing on the parapets are exhausted and have no intention of fighting ..and then we will wait for your kings and noblemen to lead a tiny charge that’ll be quashed or they will simply surrender.
It’s warfare, so it’ll be played by same rules.
Hmm.... What he said and with no deployment of Indian conventional forces it looks like no "retaliation" is coming anytime soon.
