Indian false flag and current Indo-Pak stand-off updates
- Thread starter CombatCorner
- Start date
- Status
Sharma Ji
Elite Member
Its going well, we got your fauz all on tenterhooks, exactly where we want em.
Heightened state of alert, waay more sorties than usual, troop mobilization.. you guys running helter skelter as you bunker down and prep your guns and hawai zahazes, and NAVY, and stratezic forces.
Basically, chaabi ghuma di hai, enzine istart ae..
'kahan se attack ayega, kab hoga, kis typa ka hoga'
Gangouse are on the move, aap apni tayyarian barkarar rakhein.. buss.
Patience, young padawans.
hydrabadi_arab
SpeedLimited
Yeah all well and good. If India want to use water from 3 western rivers then will have to give share in 3 eastern rivers.
Its simple formula based on international law.
吃瓜群众
Registered Member
Don't talk big, you Indian public opinion is now saying that you want to fight, do you dare? You are not a strong country, you are not capable of conquering others, you can't find your own toilet yourself, what face do you have to say Pakistan?
Vkdindian1
Registered Member
Meaning of diatribe - a forceful and bitter verbal attack against someone or something.
Your observation is completely incorrect. I didn’t say a word against anyone. Another member made a claim about 1971 and I disagreed with him. Thats all.
I didn’t say anything to hurt anyone’s pride.
But you are the mod. I hope your duty to be neutral would show at many other posts that add no value and are one liners with colourful language against India as well as against Paksiatn.
Meengla
Elite Member
Somewhere on a Pakistani channel a few days ago, an analyst was saying that RAW and ISI are trying to work on an understanding to not use proxies to target civilians in both countries; the ISI has been given an enhanced role in Pakistan's National Security Council for that. I think Pakistan Defense Minister's warning about targeting civilians in India if India targets civilians in Pakistan was a catalyst and maybe Western/Arab countries are playing some role due to their own civilians, investments etc. So, yeah, go and kill each other militarily in a conflict but spare the civilians.
If true then a welcome development.
RescueRanger
Meme Lord
In Thirteen Days, a movie about the 1962 Cuban missile crisis, US Secretary of State Robert McNamara tells Chief of Naval Operations Admiral George Anderson; “You don’t understand a thing, do you? This is not a blockade. This is language. A new vocabulary, the likes of which the world has never seen.
This is President Kennedy communicating with Secretary Khrushchev.” 1 Robert Jervis agrees: Signals are like a language in that their meanings are established by agreement, implicit if not explicit.2 Nowhere is this more applicable than in South Asia.
In his 2018 paper Professor Rizwan Zeb faculty at International Relations and Strategic Studies, Air War College Institute, Karachi discussed the impact of "nuclear signalling" from Indian in the event of an alleged false flag attack linked to Pakistan. For his theory he used the 2001 attack in India.
He hypothesized in his paper that a high percentage of indirect signalling would induce instability into a nuclear crisis.
And that a large number of actors emanating signals from the two sides would increase the likelihood of miscommunication. Also analysed is the assumption that nuclear signalling during crisis would have an impact on ground preparations either positively (demobilisation) or negatively(accelerated mobilisation).
Professor Zeb posits that as per the rationalist theory of deterrence, ensuring a first-strike capability as well as the ability to absorb a first strike and conduct a second strike is a key prerequisite for deterrence stability.
In addition, for deterrence to function, such a capability must also be perceived as real by the enemy. However, while nuclear signalling is an essential condition for deterrence stability, it can also act as an instability-inducing factor in a nuclear relationship.
Whether nuclear signals end up strengthening or diluting deterrence, to a large extent depends on the channel through which signals are transmitted, the number of actors involved in the signalling exercise, and the context in which the signals are made.
Various channels through which nuclear signals can be transmitted have varying degrees of risk associated with them. Nuclear signalling can be conducted through three channels: i) direct signalling (communication through official contact between governments/ representatives), ii) tacit signalling (actual demonstration of a capability; nuclear tests, missile tests or official policy pronouncements to that effect), and iii) indirect signalling (press and media statements addressing multiple audiences).
Using Professor Zeb;s own signalling model we can see that we are already at the stage tacit signal stage. This SHOULD be alarming, not just for India or Pakistan or its immediate neighbours, but the whole world.
This is President Kennedy communicating with Secretary Khrushchev.” 1 Robert Jervis agrees: Signals are like a language in that their meanings are established by agreement, implicit if not explicit.2 Nowhere is this more applicable than in South Asia.
In his 2018 paper Professor Rizwan Zeb faculty at International Relations and Strategic Studies, Air War College Institute, Karachi discussed the impact of "nuclear signalling" from Indian in the event of an alleged false flag attack linked to Pakistan. For his theory he used the 2001 attack in India.
He hypothesized in his paper that a high percentage of indirect signalling would induce instability into a nuclear crisis.
And that a large number of actors emanating signals from the two sides would increase the likelihood of miscommunication. Also analysed is the assumption that nuclear signalling during crisis would have an impact on ground preparations either positively (demobilisation) or negatively(accelerated mobilisation).
Professor Zeb posits that as per the rationalist theory of deterrence, ensuring a first-strike capability as well as the ability to absorb a first strike and conduct a second strike is a key prerequisite for deterrence stability.
In addition, for deterrence to function, such a capability must also be perceived as real by the enemy. However, while nuclear signalling is an essential condition for deterrence stability, it can also act as an instability-inducing factor in a nuclear relationship.
Whether nuclear signals end up strengthening or diluting deterrence, to a large extent depends on the channel through which signals are transmitted, the number of actors involved in the signalling exercise, and the context in which the signals are made.
Various channels through which nuclear signals can be transmitted have varying degrees of risk associated with them. Nuclear signalling can be conducted through three channels: i) direct signalling (communication through official contact between governments/ representatives), ii) tacit signalling (actual demonstration of a capability; nuclear tests, missile tests or official policy pronouncements to that effect), and iii) indirect signalling (press and media statements addressing multiple audiences).
Using Professor Zeb;s own signalling model we can see that we are already at the stage tacit signal stage. This SHOULD be alarming, not just for India or Pakistan or its immediate neighbours, but the whole world.
RescueRanger
Meme Lord
The fact that you can still post here is a testament to my neutrality. Anything else?
吃瓜群众
Registered Member
You are a country that doesn't even let go of lizards, you yourself are not ashamed, I am ashamed of you!
RescueRanger
Meme Lord
I wish the forum had a vomit emoji so I could react to this video with the emoji the presenter rightfully deserves.
mythbuster
SpeedLimited
Thanks for advance warning , we will have garlands ready for your reception
- Status
Users who are viewing this thread
Pakistan Defence Latest
Country Watch Latest
-
-
-
-
Breaking: First F-47 Sixth-Gen Fighter Already Being Built, Expected to Fly in 2028 (1 Viewer)- Latest: F-22Raptor