DBWI: Kashmir War doesn't go nuclear

[Plumber]

What would be the implications of the 2001-2002 Indo-Pakistani War over Kashmir remaining a limited conflict, like the Kargil War in 1999?

OOC: The POD is no 9/11.

 

[Thoresby]

30 million more people alive for starters. No stabilisation mission Pakistan*, no Indian embargo, lots of things.


*India would win any exchange and if Islamabad went (and it would) then Pakistan is going to be Somalia on steroids.

 

[lucaswillen05]

While Pakistan was effectivly destroyed (what was left was taken over by the Taliban and ended up in a similar mess to the one Afghanistan is in) India was very damaged with many of the magor cities including Dlhi, Calcutta and Mumbai destroyed among many cities. At leasr 12 mlilion Indians died in the holocaust and its aftermath. Proving, if proof were needed that there can be no winners in a nuclear war even if one side wins a technical victory as India did.

Mind you it was apparently Pakistan that stared the nuclear war by firing a nuclear shell which destroyed the 1st Indian armoured Divisiom which had broken through Pakistani lines and was leading the charge to Islamabad. How things escalated from that is very unclear as the leading military/political leaders on both sides were klled in the exchange or its immediate aftermath. Some just disappared and have not been seen o heard from since the war and so are presumed dead as it has been more than ten years since the war "ended"

I say "ended" because no peace treaty was ever signed due to the loss of the political and military commanders on both sides and the effective collapse of both countries in the aftermath. Disorganised combt coninued for a few weeks after the exchange before what remained of the Indian and Pakistani militaries decided it was futile and disbanded themselves.

 

[Asami]

We in the United States, Russia, etc. would have never learned on the dangers of nuclear war, and probably would have blown each other up within twenty or thirty years.

 

[Incognito]

And large swaths of territory in the south-east of the subcontinent would not be under the brutal control of the Naxalite revolutionaries. The west should really get its act together and expand the stabilization effort from Pakistan to include India and stamp out the Mao wannabes.

 

[Alex Richards]

And large swaths of territory in the south-east of the subcontinent would not be under the brutal control of the Naxalite revolutionaries. The west should really get its act together and expand the stabilization effort from Pakistan to include India and stamp out the Mao wannabes.

Not to mention the very messy Tamil issues in the south and Sri Lanka.

 

[Mr_ Bondoc]

The strange thing is that there would have been far fewer Indian/Pakistani restaurants across the United States. Consider how alien the idea of a "Na'an n' Curry" in a place like Boise or Des Moines would have been 10 years ago...

 

[iainbhx]

We wouldn't have had the major unrest in London and Birmingham.

 

[WrappedInShadows]

What would be the implications of the 2001-2002 Indo-Pakistani War over Kashmir remaining a limited conflict, like the Kargil War in 1999?

OOC: The POD is no 9/11.

Our troops wouldn't be re-enacting the Soviet War In Afghanistan over there as we speak.

Bring our boys home!