Dr. Shahiduzzaman: in order to change India’s habitual perception, our only answer as I feel is nuclearization.

[Pataliputra]

Your don't have a border with Baluchistan and never will lol



India had two decades of USA security umbrella with access to Baluchistan, they already had every economic advantage
and guess what they were passengers watching events unfold there as soon as USA changed course in Afghanistan.... another so called civilizational link lost... again

Just like in Bangladesh now

As big as your GDP might get Pak will always live rent free forgot about Pak, worry about china china china

I never hear China India USA Russia threatening to use nuclear weapons against each other; such threats only come from Bangladesh and Pakistan.

 

[Pingle]

Bangladesh can easily become a nuclear power given their experience with nuclear reactors.... question is can Bangladesh gather a guts to face a western wrath?? What will be the testing site considering Bangladesh smaller size with top density of population..... it's even dense than India which is a largest populated country.....
@UKBengali

 

[UKBengali]

Bangladesh can easily become a nuclear power given their experience with nuclear reactors.... question is can Bangladesh gather a guts to face a western wrath?? What will be the testing site considering Bangladesh smaller size with top density of population..... it's even dense than India which is a largest populated country.....
@UKBengali

What exactly would BD nuclear weapons serve exactly?

India will never try to invade BD and Myanmar is a tiny and dysfunctional state.

Hopefully BD can somehow get a semi-stable political system in place and focus on economic growth.

Once the economy is growing again, then the focus should be on building a decent conventional military commensurate with its population and economic size.

A decent size conventional military is more than adequate enough to safeguard BD sovereignty and nuclear weapons will just distract from this goal. BD cannot exactly lob a nuclear missile at one of its neighbours over a border skirmish.

 

[Pataliputra]

Developing a nuclear weapon isn’t rocket science, but the more important question is whether a country truly needs it. Economic and military sanctions can make the country in question even more vulnerable to external threats. Pakistan managed to acquire nuclear weapons under the security umbrella of the U.S. and NATO during the opium war in Afghanistan, yet it’s still struggling to prevent internal collapse, much like in 1971. Nuclear weapons haven’t deterred India from interfering in Pakistan either, no weapon can save a country that is financially weak.

 

[SteppeWolff]

Not sharing a border with Baluchistan is the only reason why India didn’t liberate Baluchistan

You have no idea about the dynamics of Balochistan, Balochistan has more Pashtuns than Baloch, your kind would get shot from all 4 sides here lmao

 

[SteppeWolff]

Developing a nuclear weapon isn’t rocket science, but the more important question is whether a country truly needs it. Economic and military sanctions can make the country in question even more vulnerable to external threats. Pakistan managed to acquire nuclear weapons under the security umbrella of the U.S. and NATO during the opium war in Afghanistan, yet it’s still struggling to prevent internal collapse, much like in 1971. Nuclear weapons haven’t deterred India from interfering in Pakistan either, no weapon can save a country that is financially weak.

India can't even conventionly defeat Pakistan now we don't even need Nukes for you. Go have your self fellatio somewhere else.

 

[Pingle]

What exactly would BD nuclear weapons serve exactly?

India will never try to invade BD and Myanmar is a tiny and dysfunctional state.

Hopefully BD can somehow get a semi-stable political system in place and focus on economic growth.

Once the economy is growing again, then the focus should be on building a decent conventional military commensurate with its population and economic size.

A decent size conventional military is more than adequate enough to safeguard BD sovereignty and nuclear weapons will just distract from this goal. BD cannot exactly lob a nuclear missile at one of its neighbours over a border skirmish.

Exactly..... if economy allows in future Bangladesh can try Isreal model.... small in size but deadly offensive punch against much larger enemies.....

 

[UKBengali]

Exactly..... if economy allows in future Bangladesh can try Isreal model.... small in size but deadly offensive punch against much larger enemies.....

Pakistan and India will not even use nuclear weapons if they have war over Kashmir in the future as then that would lead to catastrophe for both nations. Destroying or severely damaging both countries is not worth Kashmir for either of them.

Nuclear weapons are an absolute last, last resort before the end of a nation state and only then will an adversary fear their use and not before.

There is absolutely no scenario where a BD armed with nuclear weapons will do anything on top of having a decent conventional capability. In fact it would make defending BD sovereignty even harder due to both political, security and economic factors.

 

[Pingle]

Pakistan and India will not even use nuclear weapons if they have war over Kashmir in the future as then that would lead to catastrophe for both nations. Destroying or severely damaging both countries is not worth Kashmir for either of them.

Nuclear weapons are an absolute last, last resort before the end of a nation state and only then will an adversary fear their use and not before.

There is absolutely no scenario where a BD armed with nuclear weapons will do anything on top of having a decent conventional capability. In fact it would make defending BD sovereignty even harder due to both political, security and economic factors.

Agreed bro...

 

[Taimoor]

Mind I ask, what does Pakistan get from this arrangement?

Since this is hypothetical scenario.
Lets assume there a war between Bangladesh and Myanmar tomorrow.
Feelling threatened , Bangladesh fires Pakistani nuclear weapons on Myanmar.

Will Pakistan bear responsibility for it?

Another hypothetical scenario, some time in future, Bangladeshi government changes again and a anti - Pakistan government comes back to power (as has happened so many times in the past)

Can they sieze Pakistan nuclear weapons deployed on Bangladeshi soil and perhaps even threaten Pakistan with its own nukes?

Benefit is mentioned here:

Post in thread 'Dr. Shahiduzzaman: in order to change India’s habitual perception, our only answer as I feel is nuclearization.'

Monday at 10:27 AM

It's a interesting historical fact that creation of Pakistan as it was on 14 August 1947 was not possible without the participation of Bengalies. Muslim league was founded in Dhaka. Jinnah by any account is their founder father as well, a person who was not born and bred in west Pakistan. The "west wing" has no sole right on idea of Pakistan. 71 was a bitter family fued which led to separation of ways, like it can happen in any family. But those historical links cannot be undone. "Merging" back is not the right choice of word.

What future holds, no one knows. But having a defence...

• Taimoor

• 

I am sure these nukes are not meant to be used on a tiny Myanmar and I am sure there is no existential threat from that country, rather its India which is a threat to BD , the argument which is base of this thread.

There are always fail safe mechanisms in place to deal with worst case scenarios. Besides, you have a example of Turkey with Erdogan in charge who US tried to remove, yet same Turkish soil host American nukes. These pacts are between the deep states of the nations, they dont change on the whims of some individuals who may come and and go. Defense treaties are serious business, they dont work on the naive assumptions and wishes that you might have.

 

[BananaRepublic]

Both BD and Pakistan have serious internal issues at the moment and they best focus on that, although Pakistan admittedly has to keep Indian ambitions over Kashmir in check.

The idea of any kind of "confederation" or "nuclear umbrella" between 2 countries separated by India and wildly different cultures is for the birds. It did not work in 1947-1971 and there is no reason it will work now.

However in 10-15 years from now the Muslim nations may start the process of economic and military alignment but that is a discussion for the future when the Zio-west no longer rules the roost and so new opportunities open up for Muslim nations.

If this idiot is teaching - no wonder our students are behaving like thugs.

Teacher is a thug!!

 

[Jaeger]

Benefit is mentioned here:

Post in thread 'Dr. Shahiduzzaman: in order to change India’s habitual perception, our only answer as I feel is nuclearization.'

Monday at 10:27 AM

It's a interesting historical fact that creation of Pakistan as it was on 14 August 1947 was not possible without the participation of Bengalies. Muslim league was founded in Dhaka. Jinnah by any account is their founder father as well, a person who was not born and bred in west Pakistan. The "west wing" has no sole right on idea of Pakistan. 71 was a bitter family fued which led to separation of ways, like it can happen in any family. But those historical links cannot be undone. "Merging" back is not the right choice of word.

What future holds, no one knows. But having a defence...

• Taimoor

• 

I am sure these nukes are not meant to be used on a tiny Myanmar and I am sure there is no existential threat from that country, rather its India which is a threat to BD , the argument which is base of this thread.

There are always fail safe mechanisms in place to deal with worst case scenarios. Besides, you have a example of Turkey with Erdogan in charge who US tried to remove, yet same Turkish soil host American nukes. These pacts are between the deep states of the nations, they dont change on the whims of some individuals who may come and and go. Defense treaties are serious business, they dont work on the naive assumptions and wishes that you might have.

Defense treaties are indeed a serious business, especially ones concerning deployment of nuclear weapons and are not left whims and fantasies of fan boys.

All scenarios have to war gamed.

Never in a million years, will you see Pakistani nuclear weapons in Bangladesh.

 

[Pataliputra]

India can't even conventionly defeat Pakistan now we don't even need Nukes for you. Go have your self fellatio somewhere else.

In 1971, India's defense budget was only double that of Pakistan, and its economy was three times larger. Today, India's economy is 12 times bigger, and its defense budget is 10 times larger than Pakistan’s. On top of that, India now has a robust domestic military-industrial complex and space program, which didn’t exist in 1971.

 

[hussain0216]

In 1971, India's defense budget was only double that of Pakistan, and its economy was three times larger. Today, India's economy is 12 times bigger, and its defense budget is 10 times larger than Pakistan’s. On top of that, India now has a robust domestic military-industrial complex and space program, which didn’t exist in 1971.

Yet India has been humiliated by both Pakistan and China in recent years

That's must be even more humiliating for you

 

[Pataliputra]

Defense treaties are indeed a serious business, especially ones concerning deployment of nuclear weapons and are not left whims and fantasies of fan boys.

All scenarios have to war gamed.

Never in a million years, will you see Pakistani nuclear weapons in Bangladesh.

Pakistan wouldn’t risk its own existence for Bangladesh, and with advancements in air defense systems, conventional nuclear missiles are quickly becoming obsolete. In any future nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan, India would remain largely unharmed, while Pakistan would be wiped off the map.