whats the argument here, that a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan wouldn't affect most of the rest of the world, and therefore we shouldn't spend too much time considering it as a possibility?
Im not understanding the disagreement. The US tested 1000 bombs or just over than number during its testing phase between the 40s and the 90s, a large number of which were fission bombs, not thermonuclear fusion bombs.
Wiki article says estimates show India at having 75-100 nuclear weapons, but-
As of 1999, India was estimated to have 4200 kg of separated reactor-grade plutonium from its power reactors, which is equivalent to roughly 1000 nuclear weapons.[5][6] India is not a signatory to the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which India argues entrenches the status quo of the existing nuclear weapons states whilst preventing general nuclear disarmament
source-
India and weapons of mass destruction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
That was 10 years ago too, who knows just how many they have now, especially if they aren't part of the treaty process?
as far as Pakistan, who knows what they have?
But-
In late 2006, the Institute for Science and International Security released intelligence reports and imagery showing the construction of a new plutonium reactor at the Khushab nuclear site. The reactor is deemed to be large enough to produce enough plutonium to facilitate the creation of as many as "40 to 50 nuclear weapons a year."[56][57][58] The New York Times carried the story with the insight that this would be Pakistan's third plutonium reactor,[59] signaling a shift to dual-stream development, with Plutonium-based devices supplementing the nation's existing HEU stream to atomic warheads.
source-
Pakistan and weapons of mass destruction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yeah, there were plenty of weapons tested by the US, USSR, UK, France, ect, but no one really knows what a nuclear exchange on a major scale would bring about climatically. These two countries could have 1000s of weapons, we know that 1000s weapons set off over 50 years and half underground has limited effects internationally (debatable if you look at the damage to places like Bikini Atoll and leukemia in the southwest), but what would happen if that many are set off over a matter of minutes?
Also prevailing winds in that region would bring the fallout over the middle east and africa.
I think its something worth considering at least.