Is it at all possible for an Indian/Pakistani nuclear war to

>>31990459

This isn't the world pre 1940's OP. There's actually a forum where we can defuse such situations now called the UN. Generally speaking it works out rather well.

>>31990520
Sure is helping out the Ukraine and Middle East right now

Everyone else will stay out of it then help out with humanitarian shit afterwards

>>31990459
Honestly, the rest of the world considers them both to be trash and wouldnt care to much compared to if say... France and the UK started to trow nukes at each other for some reason.

Everyone would be on top fucking alert but I would still say that the conflict would stay between India and Pakistan.

>>31990603

There will always be regional conflicts here and there. It's been 70 years since a major global conflict has broken out. I'd say we're doing pretty good so far.

File: 1473840419270.jpg (670KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

670KB, 1600x1200px

>>31990459
I sure hope so. I have family in India and the amount of grief I've been getting from them for voting Trump has made feel like if we just got rid of that literal shithole, we all would be better off.

File: Toilet bomb 1.jpg (38KB, 512x272px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 512x272px

Pakistan would unleash a weapon the indians have never seen before

>>31990459
Even if it was contained to those two countries, the nuclear fallout would fuck up a large part of Southeast Asia. Pakistan and India would be uninhabitable for years to come, and the leftover humanitarian crisis would affect every country nearby.

>>31990790
>Pakistan and India would be uninhabitable for years to come,
Never post again.

>>31990790
And nothing of value would be lost

>>31990790
>Pakistan and India would be uninhabitable for years to come
As someone who's had the displeasure of living in one of those countries I can safely say that happened a long long time ago.

Considering neither country actually has nuclear weapons (It's all propaganda) I don't see why anyone is entertaining OP's question.

>>31990884
I'm sure with such a fantastic claim you will of course follow it up with substantial evidence and not /pol/ tier shitposting.

>>31990893

You want to keep believing the Atomic Boogyman is going to get'cha if you step out of line with what the government says, fine by me, man.

>>31990758
undercooked roast

>>31990752
why do the indians hate trump so much

>>31991078

Same reason everyone hates trump, it's the latest fad

>>31990520
>There's actually a forum where we can defuse such situations now called the UN.
UN doesn't have nukes so it is irrelevant at this level of play.

>>31992169

I'm not talking about mutually assured destruction here. Just a place to talk out our differences before it even gets to that point.

File: 1479034897040.jpg (89KB, 546x960px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 546x960px

>>31991078

Trump is against designated shitting streets.

>>31990603
Neither of which have people lobbing nukes at each other

>>31992254

A non-nuclear nation CANNOT launch nukes against its enemies and a nuclear nation has NO REASON to launch nukes against its non-nuclear nations

>>31990459
>Is it at all possible for an Indian/Pakistani nuclear war to stay contained to the two nations or would it cause nukes to launch from America/China/Russia as well?
Why would it?

>>31993321

An Indian nuclear attack on Pakistan (even one done with the pretext of a Pakistani attack on India) will cause China to launch in defense of their allies, the Paki.

It's up to bad luck if Russia or America get too jumpy from China's launches and decide to preempt.

>>31993346
>will cause China to launch in defense of their allies, the Paki.
Why do you think that will happen?

>It's up to bad luck if Russia or America get too jumpy from China's launches and decide to preempt.
Why would they do that?

>>31993387

>Why would France go to war against Germany because Russia declared war on them for standing with Austria-Hungary against Serbia?

Remember, Nations don't act like rational adults, they act like retarded children.

>>31990459
Hopefully they would stick to small arms fire and occasional airstikes with non nuclear munitions.

>>31993506
Because of treaties and time tables required for mobilization.


China has nothing to gain from firing on India in this case, and not treaty obligation to do so.

Even if they did, the US and Russia have no reason to suspect China is firing at them when they are not even involved in a crisis.

Go to the fucking archive, search for OPpenheimer, and educate yourself.

Please.

>>31990459
>pakis and poo-in-loos exchange nuclear fire
>China moves into the Kashmir region
>China then moves into India and Pakistan at large
>all under the context of providing relief to the populations
After that, fuck if I know. Might end up like the Ukraine or it could trigger a nuclear winter.

>>31990520
We also had this thing called the League of Nations before we had the UN.

>>31992407
>...a nuclear nation has NO REASON to launch nukes against its non-nuclear nations

I can think of a few. Big nation with a strong military but no nukes vs a smaller country that does have nukes? I wouldn't be surprised if the launched a few in self-defense.

>>31993651
>Big nation with a strong military but no nukes vs a smaller country that does have nukes?

oxymoron

There are no nuclear countries with small militaries, nor are there large militaries without nukes.

>>31993667
After some googling, Turkey (non-nuclear state) is considered to have a stronger military than Pakistan (nuclear state).

http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons

>>31993718

>Turkey
>Strong military

Literally what have they done

File: turk.jpg (45KB, 530x298px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 530x298px

>>31993718
>turkey having a strong military
>turkey strong military
>strong military

yea no

>>31993651

Nuclear winter is a myth anon. There have been legit natural disasters with millions of tons more debris into the atmosphere than nukes could ever manage and it didn't cause one.

>>31993779
I was referencing Fallout. The bit about how China and the US shot nukes at each other.

>>31993724
>>31993766
>I can't read: The post

>>31993816

I'd argue Paki's have a stronger military solely because they have nukes.

>>31993833
The original argument was that one anon stated that a nation with nukes would never have a reason to use them on a nation without nukes.

I'm simply pointing out that on the assumptions of Turkey having a stronger military and only Turkey and Pakistan engaging in warfare, Pakistan may very well use their nukes because they are weaker than Turkey if they don't have nukes.

>>31993816

Fair enough about fallout, but even large scale nuclear engagements wouldn't cause nuclear winter.

Both countries should be nuked back to the stone ages.

Pakis are the worst scum on planet earth

>>31993506
Because France's foreign policy in dealing with Germany for the past thirty years was literally based on revenge for the Franco-Prussian war. Frogs really wanted Alsace-Lorraine back.

>>31990752
same
Except my relatives are in Pakistan.

>>31990752

Why are Indians such ravenous child molesters? Why is incest so universal?

>>31994061
Well those kids aren't going to rape themselves, are they?

>>31994077

I guess not

>>31990459
no because they border eachother and wind is a thing

meme out all you want about nuclear winter but a nuke going off just 20km away from you is probably Not Good if youre downwind

File: 00060497.0001.png (30KB, 150x150px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 150x150px

>>31994077
idk i did

i was actually disappointed as a child after driving a screwdriver handle up my butt that some qt older boy wouldnt do it to me with his dick

>>31994170
I- I could be that qt older boy.

>>31994323
im 24 now though

youre too late

>>31990758
Made me chuckle

>>31993387
>>will cause China to launch in defense of their allies, the >>31993387
>Why do you think that will happen?
Because China has invested billions into Pakistan, requires it for Africa facing ports, requires it as a military empire against it's current largest threat, requires it for roads towards most of western asia and europe, requires it for natural gas and oil pipelines and requires it because Pakistan is their day 1 nigga in the area.

>>31993718
I'd place them even at the moment.
Technically American bases meant turkey did have nukes, although I'm 90% sure they're gone after the Erdogan "coup" and i'm 99% sure they're under american lock and key.

Even then I'd say they're about even with pakistan.

>>31995132

None of these are worth the international stain of joining America as a nation willing to commit nuclear genocide

>>31995140
>although I'm 90% sure they're gone after the Erdogan "coup"
Unlikely.

>>31996243

>Its unlikely that America didn't remove nukes from a politically unstable country

What?

File: jihadis.png (17KB, 375x516px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 375x516px

>>31993718
Its the classic ottoman mistake of confusing numbers with strength.

>>31990726
Like the old joke. Pakistan and India nuke each other, who wins?
A: The rest of the world.

>>31998426

China would lose as well, even if no nukes were launched at her

>>31993651

The League of Nations was just a prototype for the UN we have today. The UN is much stronger economically and militarily.

>>31998070
Where would they have taken them?

>>31993651
>China moves into india and pakistan at large

Any sane chink would realize how shitty this would be.

>>31990798
So nothing different.

>>31990790
Fallout becomes a non-issue after 2 weeks.