India / Pakistan won't use nukes: Pakistan nukes are LAST RESORT to stop an India invasion large enough to overwhelm half a million Pakstani soldiers WON'T HAPPEN - India: NO FIRST USE

Pakistan and India have amongst the clearest no escalation nukes policies in the world

Pakistan will

• only use nukes as a last resort

• not use them against civilians,

• not use them against any country except India,

• only if attacked by an Indian army large enough to overwhelm its own army of half a million soldiers - that is enough to support at least 200,000 Pakistani soldiers at the front line.

There is NO WAY India attacks Pakistan with such an enormous army.

Its only objective is

• to bring three terrorists and their handlers to justice.

Since Pakistan won't do anything to try to find them and prosecute them,

• India MAY send a military raid into Pakistan - a raid means it is not there to occupy territory but just to achieve a temporary objective, in this case to kill or detain the three terrorists.

• India might also use missile strikes or artillery against them if it gets intelligence of where they are.

This is NOWHERE NEAR Pakistan's nuclear threshold.

As for India, it is

• the nuclear power with the most clear no first use policy of any nuclear power.

• India will not be first to use nukes against Pakistan.

India has put resolutions to the UN General Assembly since 1982 calling for a conference to end all nukes.

India submits four nuclear disarmament resolutions every year. These

• always get adopted by the General Assembly but

• are only suggestive, to be binding they'd need to pass in the UN Security Council where the five permanent members are all nuclear states and would veto them.

So India’s disarmament never get anywhere but India persists with them every year symbolically to keep the world's attention on this issue

• some day hopefully it succeeds.

Here are the four resolutions that India submits to the UN General Council every year and the UNGC adopts every year - but never get adopted by the UN Security council:

• A/RES/79/64 Convention on the Prohibition of the Use of Nuclear Weapons

• A/RES/79/42 Measures to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction

• A/RES/79/33 Reducing nuclear danger

• A/RES/79/23 Role of science and technology in the context of international security and disarmament

So India is a most implausible country to use nukes.

Red text: Frequent military clashes every year except 2022 and a small war in 1999.

CLEAREST EXAMPLE TO SHOW MILITARY SKIRMISHES - and EVEN WAR between nuclear states - DO NOT ESCALATE to nuclear war

This is special to India. The others want to eventually eliminate all nukes as an aspiration. India wants it to happen super quickly and has asked for it since 1982.

Pakistan and India frequently have military clashes, the clearest example we have - demonstrated numerous times that military clashes betwen nuclear powers do NOT escalate to nukes

Pakistan and India have had

• multiple military clashes every year this century

• except in 2022 when they were in the middle of a ceasfire that lasted until it was broken in 2023.

Pakistan and India

• had a small fullscale war in 1999.

Back then

• both sides had the capability to drop nukes from their planes and didn't even consider it.

• Only India deployed fighter jets to the conflict, Pakistan didn't.

• India had 30,000 soldier sin the Kargil war and Paksitan defending, only 5,000.

• It lasted for several months and several hundred died on both sides.

These two countries are the world's clearest example to show that nuclear weapon states can have military clashes with no risk of escalation,

• shows that countries do NOT automatically escalate to nukes for rather obvious reasons.

Myth that one nuke would lead to everyone using nukes - maybe in war games without real people - in the real world would lead to largest humanitarian operation world has ever seen - and greatly reinforce movement to abolish all nukes

Then on that persistent myth that if there is one nuke fired anywhere in the world in combat that every nuclear armed nation would then fire all its nukes at everyone. That makes UTTERLY NO SENSE.

I have a debunk of that myth in my blog post. The opposite would happen.

• If there ever was another Hiroshima with live streaming of everything on the internet, then

• the next thing would happen is the impacted country would call for help internationally as it takes very specialist expertise to treat whole body burns injuries and radiation sickness.

If the victims know to get indoors out of fallout the risk is greatly reduced for radiation sickness.

But there aren't that many people in the world who would know how to treat radiation sickness and it's also difficult to treat burns victims and both those require large supplies of equipment too. It would surely be

• the largest humanitarian crisis the world has ever responded to in the modern world where such victims can be treated effectively.

• a million victims of radiation sickness and burns would stretch the emergency medical capabilities of the entire world.

There would be emergency response teams flying there from everywhere in the world.

There is

• NO WAY that other countries would respond to the news by launching nukes at civilians themselves.

It would be the opposite.

Citizens

• support nukes because they have been assured it makes them safe from military attacks.

If that is shown to not be true then there would be widespread calls for immediate abolition of nukes.

No risk of a world war or nuclear war - we can see this because governments never warn about fallout like they did in the cold war - which would save millions of lives if there was a real risk

There is no risk of a world war. You can tell that governments don’t seriously believe that there really is a risk of a world war because if they did, they would tell their civilians how to protect themselves from fallout.

Tens of thousands of the civilians in Hiroshima died AFTER the explosion from fallout - many know that but most people don’t know:

• most of those lives could have been saved with simple instructions to stay indoors until the fallout dust loses its radioactivity.

Older people ion the UK know that they need to get indoors if there is a nuke and stay well away from the dust.

• I doubt if as many as 1 in 100 of younger people know this

We don’t know this because

• we don’t need to know it

• because there is no risk of a nuclear war

The governments are NOT hiding this information from us.

And it makes NO SENSE for politicians to bluff about nukes and then not to tell people how to protect themselves from fallout to avoid scaring them.

Not telling us about fallout shows that they are not serious in their bluffs or their political statements about risking a world war.

I there was a real risk as in the cold war the government would be telling us about this every day, a short 1 minute video every day much like the videos during COVID lockdown.

The information would be prominently displayed in the news websites also.

This is not happening because government leaders know full well that there is no real risk of a nuclear war.

See my:

Also

BLOG: Why so many exaggerate nukes: activists advocate
— Governments deter
— Putin bluffs
— NATO countries motivate
— Ukraine seeks help
— Leaders promote
— Media click bait
— Video makers go viral
— Trolls wind up
— Scared panic & truth gets forgotten
READ HERE: https://debunkingdoomsday.quora.com/Why-so-many-exaggerate-nukes-activists-advocate-Governments-deter-Putin-bluffs-NATO-countries-motivate-Ukraine

For more about Pakistan and India:

CONTACT ME VIA PM OR ON FACEBOOK OR EMAIL

You can Direct Message me on Substack - but I check this rarely. Or better, email me at support@robertinventor.com

Or best of all Direct Message me on Facebook if you are okay joining Facebook. My Facebook profile is here:. Robert Walker I usually get Facebook messages much faster than on the other platforms as I spend most of my day there.

FOR MORE HELP

To find a debunk see: List of articles in my Debunking Doomsday blog to date See also my Short debunks

Scared and want a story debunked? Post to our Facebook group. Please look over the group rules before posting or commenting as they help the group to run smoothly

• Facebook group Doomsday Debunked

Also do join our facebook group if you can help with fact checking or to help scared people who are panicking.

SEARCH LIST OF DEBUNKS

You can search by title and there’s also an option to search the content of the blog using a google search.

CLICK HERE TO SEARCH: List of articles in my Debunking Doomsday blog to date

NEW SHORT DEBUNKS

I do many more fact checks and debunks on our facebook group than I could ever write up as blog posts. They are shorter and less polished but there is a good chance you may find a short debunk for some recent concern.

I often write them up as “short debunks”

See Latest short debunks for new short debunks

I also tweet the debunks and short debunks to my Blue Sky page here:

. doomsdaydebunks.bsky.social

I do the short debunks more often but they are less polished - they are copies of my longer replies to scared people in the Facebook group.

I go through phases when I do lots of short debunks. Recently I’ve taken to converting comments in the group into posts in the group that resemble short debunks and most of those haven’t yet been copied over to the wiki.

TIPS FOR DEALING WITH DOOMSDAY FEARS

If suicidal or helping someone suicidal see my:

BLOG: Supporting someone who is suicidal

If you have got scared by any of this, health professionals can help. Many of those affected do get help and find it makes a big difference.

They can’t do fact checking, don’t expect that of them. But they can do a huge amount to help with the panic, anxiety, maladaptive responses to fear and so on.

Also do remember that therapy is not like physical medicine. The only way a therapist can diagnose or indeed treat you is by talking to you and listening to you. If this dialogue isn’t working for whatever reason do remember you can always ask to change to another therapist and it doesn’t reflect badly on your current therapist to do this.

Also check out my Seven tips for dealing with doomsday fears based on things that help those scared, including a section about ways that health professionals can help you.

I know that sadly many of the people we help can’t access therapy for one reason or another - usually long waiting lists or the costs.

There is much you can do to help yourself. As well as those seven tips, see my:

BLOG: Doing what matters at times of stress
— new WHO booklet to help with mental health during COVID19 pandemic

BLOG: Breathe in and out slowly and deeply and other ways to calm a panic attack

BLOG: Tips from CBT
— might help some of you to deal with doomsday anxieties

PLEASE DON’T COMMENT HERE WITH POTENTIALLY SCARY QUESTIONS ABOUT OTHER TOPICS - INSTEAD COMMENT ON POST SET UP FOR IT

If you have potentially scary questions about any other topic please post here: https://robertinventor.substack.com/p/post-to-comment-on-with-off-topic-29a Post to comment on, with off topic potentially scary comments - or send me a private message - or use our group on Facebook

The reason is I often aren't able to respond to comments for some time and the unanswered comment can scare people who come to this post for help on something else

Also even when answered the comment may scare them because they see it first.

It works much better to put comments on other topics on a special post for them.

It is absolutely fine to digress and go off topic in conversations here - this is specifically about things you want help with that might scare people.

PLEASE DON’T TELL A SCARED PERSON THAT THE THING THEY ARE SCARED OF IS TRUE WITHOUT A VERY RELIABLE SOURCE OR IF YOU ARE A VERY RELIABLE SOURCE YOURSELF - AND RESPOND WITH CARE

This is not like a typical post on substack. It is specifically to help people who are very scared with voluntary fact checking. Please no politically motivated exaggerations here. And please be careful, be aware of the context.

We have a rule in the Facebook group and it is the same here.

If you are scared and need help it is absolutely fine to comment about anything to do with the topic of the post that scares you.

But if you are not scared or don’t want help with my voluntary fact checking please don’t comment with any scary material.

If you respond to scared people here please be careful with your sources. Don’t tell them that something they are scared of is true without excellent reliable sources, or if you are a reliable source yourself.

It also matters a lot exactly HOW you respond. E.g. if someone is in an area with a potential for earthquakes there’s a big difference between a reply that talks about the largest earthquake that’s possible there even when based on reliable sources, and says nothing about how to protect themselves and the same reply with a summary and link to measures to take to protect yourself in an earthquake.