And where exactly does this 'offensive' Cold Start plan play out? Let me help.. in Pakistani territory since its a Pakistan specific doctrine. And any 'offensive action' carried out by a recognized state-army in the territory of another sovereign state is called an 'invasion' in all legal and moral language.Cold Start is not an invasion plan.
Cold Start is an operational plan devised from the experience of Operation Parakram (2001-2002) it is a limited offense plan devised to ensure speed in deployment of forces. It must also be added that Cold Start as such does not have a lot of backing in India. The Army ofcourse supports it, however the entire politic doesnot seem to.
Again, the statement you put forth by IAF chief is, what is called, 'sabre-rattling' in foreign policy language. Not to mention that he says, any attack on the 'country' would be cause for retaliation. But the Nasr missile is not designed to attack 'India' per se but its invading forces who would be in Pakistani territory for it to be used. I'm sure the Indian planners would be scratching their heads in that kind of scenario since that action by Pakistan, in NO legal terminology, represents an 'attack on India'.However in order to make you understand the view of the Indian Armed forces reg the Nasr, pl refer to the IAF chiefs response to queries directly in respect to usage of Nasr. His language indicates that it would be expected that there would be heavy nuclear retaliation if a nuclear weapon is used and it would be as per stated policy.
Response to strike from Pak will be very heavy: IAF chief - Times Of India