my worry is the nukes too

We should wait till after nukes are dropped, maybe a few decades after, to judge whether it was a good or bad thing.

Japan did better after nukes.

I'm not saying that they're necessarily a good thing. But they can be a good thing.

(Source: [before the inevitable downvotes] am Indian.)

I'm not sure Pakistan is comparable to Imperial Japan.

> (Source: [before the inevitable downvotes] am Indian.)

How does that relate to downvotes after saying something like that?

(I'm saying that both sides dropping nukes on each other would be a good thing. I'm adding credibility to that statement by saying I have skin in the game. I'm expecting downvotes because my post is anti-pacifist.)

Yes, and I'm saying that that's obviously not a good thing.

There aren't a lot of examples of a country being unwilling or unable to fight in a full-scale war, and instead launching nukes at their next door neighbor. I don't think this is part of the playbook, or based on evidence, I think it's coming from anxiety.

There aren’t a lot of examples of nuclear states being attacked by a stronger military power

Consider: willing but unable to fight any more, overpowered, and unwilling to surrender. That's where launching nukes, the ultimate weapon of retaliation, could look very enticing.

More important ,ever since the multipolar great games resumed , they will have customers for nukes. Trump really was the final nail on deterence reliance ..

That may be a long-term problem, but right now it's like worrying about high cholesterol during a knife fight.

Its not, you goto look at how the actors in the region act and invest. Some of the regions rich seem remarkable calm towards a muklear armed iran.

Can Pakistan can ship nukes to Iran fast enough for the Iranian economy to supply in return a militarily useful quantity of anti-air and anti-missile defence systems? On a timescale of "shooting currently happening"? If not, that's a problem for the rest of the decade, whereas an escalating situation on this border could've already evaporated a few cities between me having read the headline 20 minutes ago and pressing the [reply] button now.

It is not that they didn't try supplying Iran with nuclear tech.

https://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/pakistan/nytimes0...

Date stamp: February 12, 2004

This is why I'm comparing nuclear trade to high cholesterol. It's a long-term issue.

The "knife fight" comparison is that they just got hit. The military needs are "literally, not metaphorically, yesterday".

Its ok, most of pakistan moved to London anyway so we dont have much to worry about.

They are not going to use nukes.

I always wonder at the people who have this idea that states are going to use nukes on a whim. The taboo against the use of nukes is very strong, so strong that I believe nuclear armed nations would rather wage conventional warfare even at great cost, and consider nukes only in the extreme situation where the very survival of the state is seriously threatened (and even then I'm doubtful nukes would be used). The only other realistic situation where nukes are used is in an accidental scenario.

That is why conventional military strength is still very much important in the world now. The Europeans are finding this out a bit late.

It's also why Putin is a great actor and bluffer. Trust me, he's the last person who would think of using nukes, despite appearances to the contrary. Now, if he were to somehow use nukes on an actual populated area, I believe the western powers would NOT use nukes in retaliation, so it seems like he would have a found a way out of MAD. But, the conventional response (likely a containment rather than an attack on Russia, e.g., a no fly zone and destruction of military assets, with the threat of nuclear retaliation backing it up) would be so strong that the Russia would be effectively neutralized. If they persist in nuking, then all bets are off, WW3 begins, and civilization could end.

They did transport those nukes in unmarked army trucks in normal traffic with only light guard , out of fear other nations (like the us) could step in to take the toys away, which was a constant background noise during the Afghanistan war. This nations secret service (ISI) has trained,armed and send terrorist groups into other nations. Bin Laden was found in a compound in a garrison city. Those djihadis do believe in that paradise afterlife of theirs no matter how much you belittle their faith. They say how little they value lifes proud and openly . Please stop projecting western sentiments on another culture for once and listen, just listen to what they say. I dont want to eat closed loop greenhouse produce for the rest of my halflife just because somebody who grew up in a golden surplus time is unwilling to engage in grim realities, to prevent them .

Does this hold even for North Korea?

Europe doesn't have the capacity to impose a no-fly zone on Russia. I doubt even US could pull that off.

Anyway, the real concern wrt nukes is that they require people in government who are at least marginally sane and care about self-preservation. The problem with countries like Russia and Pakistan is that it's one coup away from being run by people who genuinely believe that they are fighting a holy war against some kind of worldwide Satanic conspiracy. Such people are unlikely to hold power for long, but with nukes, they don't have to.

> Europe doesn't have the capacity to impose a no-fly zone on Russia. I doubt even US could pull that off.

I'm not sure about that.

Let me put it this way. US has a strong enough military that it could do so if it really wanted, but it would involve a lot of casualties. I doubt that the American public would be willing to sustain the amount it would require.

IDK Man. There was no institutional power in the US that seemed to make a serious effort when a known international pe*o peddler mysteriously unalived himeself. Somone with direct personal relationships with British Royalty, US Presidents (among other Gov Officials), and some of the richest men in the western world (eg Bill Gates). Apparently terabytes of video tapes gone.

Also note his island has a full on Egyptian Temple on it, and no-one has any idea what's underground.

None of these things are disputed. Sounds pretty Satanic and International to me.

No one is going to deploy nukes. They have no use against the troops. To level enemy city? Mass casualties, but would not help to win the modern war.

That's why there was no sense for Ukraine to keep nukes. They should have kept strategic bombers, though.

They had neither money nor ability to support their bombers. And that’s why they happily cut them to pieces for US dollars. Russia managed to get just a part of the fleet thanks to massive gas debt already accumulated by Ukraine back then.