• Wednesday, January 22, 2020

Tipu Sultan, Pakistani Nukes and Collaborators of the day

Discussion in 'Pakistan Strategic Forces' started by Zarvan, May 4, 2019.

  1. Zarvan


    Apr 28, 2011
    +84 / 49,827 / -13
    By Dr Shahid Qureshi: –

    Today 4th May, is death anniversary of Tipu Sultan, he was the only Muslim ruler in India who used modern short-range missiles against the British but lost the battle due to ‘treachery of Mir Sadiq’ and killed on 4 May 1799, Srirangapatna, because gates of the fort were opened from inside. It means kill the collaborators first otherwise your missiles and nukes will not save you Pindi Boys. As “Enemy – Agenda: to De-Nuke, De-Rail & Defenceless Pakistan”. I said to a security analyst in London. British bring his missiles back to England for reverse engineering and now in the Artillery museum near Woolwich Arsenal in the Royal Borough of Greenwich.

    London best pest control
    J Wilkerson former chief of staff of US General Colin Powel said something like, ‘what we know now is that sources of the intelligence on Iraqi WMDS were not credible and Colin Powel was probably misled and deliberately sent to the UN Security Council with false or half true information. The name ‘Chelabi’ an Iraqi collaborator in exile seems central to most of the information US had on biological, chemical and nuclear programs’.

    In the current scenario look at the statements of Bilalwal Zardari Bhutto. He is no different than Dilip Singh son of Mahraja Ranjit Singh whom British took away to London and he became Catholic in London but everyone was thinking he was a Sikh.

    Maryam Nawaz, Shabaz Sharif and Nawaz Sharif are other collaborators with Indians and foreigners in Europe and US. They are guilty of Dawn leaks and active RAW agents were arrested from their mills but PTM’s Manzoor Pashteen is more guilty. Security establishment should have a fairness and equality in their actions against enemies of the state be it rich or poor.

    Let me tell you that: ‘18th Amendment was purposed by Asif Zardari and Altaf Hussain supported by Nawaz Sharif in the parliament is actually a foundation to weaken the federation and break Pakistan following the article 70 of Soviet Constitution which lead to the break up of Soviet Union. All three of them have same handlers in 5 I’s. It is time to ‘men with guns’ to open their both eyes and see PTM, PPP and PML-N equally. All happened under your nose and no body smelt the danger or was it an intelligence failure?

    Nawaz Sharif, Shabaz Sharif, Maryam Nawaz, Bilawal Bhutto, Asif Zaradri and Rehman Malik are doing exactly what Chelabi did in Iraq. They are misleading the westerns by saying something like that ‘mullahs’ are going to take control of ‘Pakistani Nukes’ as if they are lying in some fruit market. There are people in the US and West, who are more interested in fiction then reality. These foreign fed traitors like Hussain Haqani sing what neo-cons want to hear and not what they should know.

    They got Pakistan into IMF trap deliberately to ruin the economy like Greece. They will sell all the national assets to IMF cronies, and in the end cripple the economy to surrender the nuclear program. The debt burdening was a military strategy to weaken Pakistan from 2008 – 2018 by Zardari and Nawaz Sharif.


    Pakistanis don’t need lecturing from outside about how to protect nukes and use missiles. A painting in the reception lobby of NASA’s flight facility at Wallop Island shows Tipu Sultan’s soldiers launching rockets attacks against the British. He was the first Muslim rocketry warfare hero. The current Pakistani nuclear and missile program seems a revival of the 18th century dream of Tipu Sultan’.

    The British captured more than 700 rockets and subsystems of 900 rockets in the battle of Turukhanahally in 1799. Tipu Sultan’s army had 27 brigades called Kushoons, and each brigade had a company of rocket men, called Jourks. These rockets had been taken to England by William Congreve and were subjected by the British to what we call “reverse engineering” today.

    Tipu Sultan was the only ruler in the world who died in the battlefield fighting the enemy according to a French scholar. Tipu Sultan reigned 1782-1799 and died in May 1799, fighting the combined forces of British and collaborators, the Nizam of Hyderabad, and the Marhattas. He lost the battle because of deceit and treachery by collaborators like Mir Sadiq and Mir Jafar in Bengal. Mir Jafar’s treachery resulted in 200 years British rule over India.

    It seems Iraqis and Pakistanis have learnt how to deal with occupiers and invaders i.e. ‘kill the collaborators first’. Pakistanis are keeping close eyes on their collaborators living both in and outside of Pakistan.

    US had used nuclear weapons against the civilians and also have made nuclear threats more than 60 times. US must check its own back yard as far as nuclear safety is concerned. Its own pilots have been sacked for flying around with live nuclear warheads for hours and claimed ‘they thought it was dummy’ not very long ago. How irresponsible and dangerous is that?

    They must understand that people of Pakistan have thousands of year’s glorious history and civilisations behind them. People of Pakistan have no history of genocide, slavery and criminality. Why US have more than 10,000 nuclear weapons and who is going to invade her? Pakistan has genuine threat from its hostile and nasty neighbour India and need a nuclear deterrent that’s all. As far as the security of the nukes is concerned no one should worry including US, they are in safe hands and Pakistanis don’t need patronising.

    Pakistan is a responsible nuclear state and they know how to defend its assets.


    File photo: Dr Shahid Qureshi defence analyst meeting with General. Zubair Mahmood Hayat, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee (CJCSC), Pakistan Army.

    A British think tank International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS) published a dossier about the Dr AQ Khan and nuclear proliferation.

    I mentioned to Mark Fitzpatrick before the launch that: “word ‘dossier’ is associated with lies, deception and dodgy in the context of Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destructions (WMDs).

    I told him that: “more than 170 British companies were involved in the Iraqi chemical and biological weapons program according to Channel 4. When journalist presented the list of the companies supplied chemical and biological material to Saddam Hussein regime to Ministry of Defence, the response was something like ‘list is correct”. The moral of the story is that people don’t trust the dodgy dossiers and biased reports.


    File photo: Dr Shahid Qureshi presented Ravian’s Gold Medal to Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan in The Government College Lahore in 1990s

    I asked Dr John Chipman Director General of the IISS and Mark Fitzpatrick editor of dossier Nuclear Black Markets: Pakistan, AQ Khan and the rise of proliferation networks, in the Q&A:

    “(a) Is there any nuclear program in the world, in which human and material proliferation were not involved? (b) your report seems unfair because you have not mentioned anything about the Israeli nuclear program, proliferation and illegal assistance by the US and Western countries.? Two paragraphs about Israeli Nuclear program in 176-page document. (c) What national and international law Dr A Q Khan has violated and what should be his punishment.

    Mark Fitzpatrick agreed that: “there is no nuclear program in the world where proliferation did not happen; US program was based on proliferation i.e. technical and material knowledge of the German Nazi scientist. He agreed that: “Israelis were involved in proliferation in a roundabout way”. He stated that: ‘Israeli program was assisted by the states than private individuals’. It is like saying if an individual is involved in terrorism, he or she should brought to justice but if a state is involved in state terrorism, that’s OK.

    According to common knowledge Dr Khan did not violate any national or international law. He could have been accused of smuggling or illegal trading like British use to trade in drugs (opium) with China in the past. We should not make a moral issue of things, which are strategic or related to security of small insecure countries.

    If Israel who is not NPT signatory can be allowed to have nuclear weapons and program because it is ‘surrounded by hostile neighbours’ why can’t Iran who is NPT signatory allowed to have a peaceful nuclear program under IAEA safe guards. What is the point on signing NPT when one cannot benefit of it? I think it’s time that NPT should be reviewed if it is not serving the purpose.

    Nasty friend like US and real enemy like India never stopped conspiring and undermining Pakistan, now they have joined hands without a doubt. On the other hand, as far as safety and security of the much-protected Nukes are concerned People of Pakistan are competent to protect and ready to eliminate enemies be local or foreign…

    (Dr Shahid Qureshi is senior analyst with BBC and chief editor of The London Post. He writes on security, terrorism and foreign policy. He also appears as analyst on Al-Jazeera, Press TV, MBC, Kazak TV (Kazakhstan), LBC Radio London. He was also international election observer for Kazakhstan 2015 and 2016 and Pakistan 2002. He has written a famous book “War on Terror and Siege of Pakistan” published in 2009. He wrote his MA thesis on ‘Political Thought of Imam Khomeini’ and visited Tehran University. He is PhD in ‘Political Psychology’ also studied Law at a British University. He also speaks at Cambridge University and visiting professor in Hebe University in China)

    Views expressed are not of The London Post.

    • Thanks Thanks x 8
  2. Respect4Respect01

    Respect4Respect01 SENIOR MEMBER

    Sep 20, 2010
    +0 / 3,220 / -0
    Musharraf performed really well if you look at this chart, Nawaz and Zardari should be tried for treason instead of him. Almost 60 billion dollars loan in 10 years is nothing but ghadari.
    • Thanks Thanks x 4
  3. Qutb-ud-din Aybak

    Qutb-ud-din Aybak SENIOR MEMBER

    Jan 22, 2015
    +3 / 7,277 / -2
    this article is biased.
    When Musharraf was the president, the whole world was supporting Pakistan and Pakistan was progressing.
    When Zardari came to power, then 80% of KPK and FATA were under terrorists control. We were in the black list. There was talk of shutting down Karachi stock exchange. We were facing a war similar to what Syria is facing today.
    during nawaz rule the war was still going on. Then there was dharna by Imran and Canadian baba. We were in complete turmoil situation till 2016. Then came CPEC. Now for CPEC early harvesting projects we needed to import heavy machinery which increased our import bill and we had to take loans to cover the trade deficit.
    Now when most of those projects have been completed, the imports have drasticaaly fallen and exports are increasing.
    Yes, those parties did corruption but u can't blame them for everything. Imran is facing the situation when we are coming out of it and before next election the projects started by previous governments through loans will start giving fruits and we will see a stable and long term growth. But still next 2 years are important for the future of Pakistan. After that if everything go right, even a double digit growth is possible in the next decade.
  4. WarKa DaNG


    Aug 26, 2014
    +0 / 647 / -0
    Wow it looks like Musharraf was a good one than zardari and nawaz both combined
  5. LeGenD


    Aug 28, 2006
    +24 / 8,634 / -0
    "And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know [it]." - Surah Al-Baqarah (2:42)

    This article fit the bill unfortunately.

    This published article contend that Tipu Sultan lost his final battle with the British due to a tactical error, and the scale of betrayals within his ranks are exaggerated: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3876555


    Contrary to popular belief (disinformation), the implied sources of intelligence were correct about the presence of chemical weapons stockpiles in Iraq: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...t/chemical-weapons-iraq-pentagon-secrets.html


    "The Pentagon created a toll-free hotline to report potential exposure and seek medical screening. As of March 2015, 544 people had called the hotline to report being exposed. In late 2014, the Pentagon formed a group, led by Brad R. Carson, under secretary of the Army, to identify service members potentially exposed to chemical weapons and screen them for care. The group issued guidelines this month that also cover troops exposed to chlorine. Mr. Carson apologized for the military’s mishandling of past cases. The group acknowledged that the Pentagon had previously been notified that more than 800 American troops believed they were exposed, but the Pentagon failed to follow up thoroughly."

    Photo evidence of the physical condition of an American soldier exposed to mustard gas munitions in Iraq: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/...ndling-of-chemical-weapon-exposure-cases.html

    Here is another but related revelation (Operation Avarice): https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/16/...ght-and-destroyed-iraqi-chemical-weapons.html

    Nevertheless, reasons for toppling Saddam regime in Iraq were complex.

    IMHO, Bush administration wanted to reshape the political landscape of the Middle East and 'regime change' in Iraq was the first major step towards this end (refer to the AXIS OF EVIL agenda); Israel would also benefit from this move in the sense that it would have one less opponent to worry about in the aftermath (i.e. a hostile Iraq). Unfortunately, this move ruined the lives of millions of Iraqi people as well. In addition, post-invasion Iraq attracted lot of bad apples from across its borders who made the situation for Iraqi people even worse by stoking Shia-Sunni-Kurd discord which led to Civil Wars in the region (2006 - 2008; 2013 - 2017) - the unintended byproduct of intervention in Iraq. However, American Military Industrial Complex (AMIC) capitalized on the shit-show to its advantage so no worries - Bush administration is FORGIVEN for its crimes against humanity. SAD.

    Now, I am no fan of these political parties (very vocal against each) but come on; this is a VERY BOLD ACCUSATION.

    MQM had foreign connections (India; Iran; UK), and this political party was sorted out by the Rangers under the able leadership of Raheel Sharif - a step in the right direction.

    However, Dr. Shahid Qureshi conveniently overlooked the fact that Pakistan Army have a hand in propelling both PML(N) and MQM to great heights back in the days of Zia-ul-Haq and Pervez Musharraf respectively. These political experiments of Pakistan Army proved shortsighted and damaged Pakistan in the long-term.

    "A protégé of military leader Gen Zia ul-Haq - who ruled Pakistan from 1977 to 1988 - Sharif is perhaps best known outside Pakistan for ordering the country's first nuclear tests in 1998." - BBC

    Unfortunately, both PML(N) and MQM turned out incompetent and corrupt to the bone, and mismanaged Pakistan's economy in the long-term (the latter mismanaged and terrorized Pakistan's largest city Karachi for many years).

    As far as PPP is concerned, well, I am not sure from where to begin. Its founding father is complicit in split of Pakistan, Benazir Bhutto FAILED to deliver in the capacity of Prime Minister and is responsible for making electricity generation process very expensive (IPP), Asif Ali Zardari is a criminal, and Bilawal Bhutto is a joke. Clearly a political party of MISFITS and CLOWNS.

    External debt continue to pile up regardless: https://tribune.com.pk/story/1910055/2-pti-govt-adds-rs2-42tr-debt-six-months/

    Even with a good man (i.e. Imran Khan) at the helm of affairs, not sure when relief will come and socio-economic development will materialize in true sense.

    Childish argument. Pakistan became a nuclear power at a much later stage then established nuclear powers such as USA, and Pakistan's experience in safeguarding its nuclear assets was relatively limited accordingly. It is FUNNY that Pakistani establishment have a history of engagements with US and IAEA in this regard, but Dr. Shahid Qureshi want us to believe otherwise. :rolleyes:

    [1] https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/new...n-pakistan-nuclear-power-and-sdgs-highlighted

    [2] http://www.mofa.gov.pk/documents/PNSR.pdf

    [3] https://www.thenews.com.pk/latest/283924-pakistan-adopts-latest-iaeas-protocols-on-nuclear-trade

    Numerous Pakistani officers and scientists even attended courses of IAEA in relation to 'nuclear safety and security'.

    Now, recall those days when TTP had overrun numerous parts of Pakistan including Swat valley and came very close to Islamabad. The entire world was watching and thinking...


    FYI: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8046577.stm

    TTP was the unintended byproduct of Pakistan being an ally of USA in its War On Terror mission vis-a-vis Afghanistan; some misguided tribal leaders (settled near the Durand Line) joined hands to wage jihad against the Pakistani establishment under the banner of TTP, not realizing that these idiots would end up advancing the interests of India in the region instead.

    Nevertheless, Pervez Musharraf made the right choice in relation to War On Terror - Pakistan had to rid itself from the menace of terrorism and keep forces of extremism under check within its domain. Thanks in part to this strategic shift, EVIL forces such as Al-Qaeda Network and TTP are effectively dealt with, and much of the world is willing to give Pakistan another chance.

    World War II - hello.

    Yes, US have its share of negligence in this respect but US have learned from these mistakes and fixed its 'nuclear safety and security' regime.

    American nuclear power plants are well-designed, robust and safe on average. Just one accident occurred in 1979 but American authorities were quick to respond and prevented a major catastrophe.

    Security – terrorism, etc
    Since the World Trade Centre attacks in New York in 2001 there has been increased concern about the consequences of a large aircraft being used to attack a nuclear facility with the purpose of releasing radioactive materials. Various studies have looked at similar attacks on nuclear power plants. They show that nuclear reactors would be more resistant to such attacks than virtually any other civil installations – see Appendix 3. A thorough study was undertaken by the US Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) using specialist consultants and paid for by the US Dept. of Energy. It concludes that US reactor structures "are robust and (would) protect the fuel from impacts of large commercial aircraft".

    The analyses used a fully-fuelled Boeing 767-400 of over 200 tonnes as the basis, at 560 km/h – the maximum speed for precision flying near the ground. The wingspan is greater than the diameter of reactor containment buildings and the 4.3 tonne engines are 15 metres apart. Hence analyses focused on single engine direct impact on the centreline – since this would be the most penetrating missile – and on the impact of the entire aircraft if the fuselage hit the centreline (in which case the engines would ricochet off the sides). In each case no part of the aircraft or its fuel would penetrate the containment. Other studies have confirmed these findings.

    Penetrating (even relatively weak) reinforced concrete requires multiple hits by high speed artillery shells or specially-designed "bunker busting" ordnance – both of which are well beyond what terrorists are likely to deploy. Thin-walled, slow-moving, hollow aluminum aircraft, hitting containment-grade heavily-reinforced concrete disintegrate, with negligible penetration. But further (see Sept 2002 Science paper and Jan 2003 Response & Comments), realistic assessments from decades of analyses, lab work and testing, find that the consequence of even the worst realistic scenarios – core melting and containment failure – can cause few if any deaths to the public, regardless of the scenario that led to the core melt and containment failure. This conclusion was documented in a 1981 EPRI study, reported and widely circulated in many languages, by Levenson and Rahn in Nuclear Technology.

    In 1988 Sandia National Laboratories in USA demonstrated the unequal distribution of energy absorption that occurs when an aircraft impacts a massive, hardened target. The test involved a rocket-propelled F4 Phantom jet (about 27 tonnes, with both engines close together in the fuselage) hitting a 3.7m thick slab of concrete at 765 km/h. This was to see whether a proposed Japanese nuclear power plant could withstand the impact of a heavy aircraft. It showed how most of the collision energy goes into the destruction of the aircraft itself – about 96% of the aircraft's kinetic energy went into the its destruction and some penetration of the concrete – while the remaining 4% was dissipated in accelerating the 700-tonne slab. The maximum penetration of the concrete in this experiment was 60 mm, but comparison with fixed reactor containment needs to take account of the 4% of energy transmitted to the slab. See also video clip.

    As long ago as the late 1970s, the UK Central Electricity Generating Board considered the possibility of a fully-laden and fully-fuelled large passenger aircraft being hijacked and deliberately crashed into a nuclear reactor. The main conclusions were that an airliner would tend to break up as it hit various buildings such as the reactor hall, and that those pieces would have little effect on the concrete biological shield surrounding the reactor. Any kerosene fire would also have little effect on that shield. In the 1980s in the USA, at least some plants were designed to take a hit from a fully-laden large military transport aircraft and still be able to achieve and maintain cold shutdown.

    The study of a 1970s US power plant in a highly-populated area is assessing the possible effects of a successful terrorist attack which causes both meltdown of the core and a large breach in the containment structure – both extremely unlikely. It shows that a large fraction of the most hazardous radioactive isotopes, like those of iodine and tellurium, would never leave the site.

    Much of the radioactive material would stick to surfaces inside the containment or becomes soluble salts that remain in the damaged containment building. Some radioactive material would nonetheless enter the environment some hours after the attack in this extreme scenario and affect areas up to several kilometres away. The extent and timing of this means that with walking-pace evacuation inside this radius it would not be a major health risk. However it could leave areas contaminated and hence displace people in the same way as a natural disaster, giving rise to economic rather than health consequences.

    Looking at spent fuel storage pools, similar analyses showed no breach. Dry storage and transport casks retained their integrity. "There would be no release of radionuclides to the environment".

    Similarly, the massive structures mean that any terrorist attack even inside a plant (which are well defended) and causing loss of cooling, core melting and breach of containment would not result in any significant radioactive releases.

    However, while the main structures are robust, the 2001 attacks did lead to increased security requirements and plants were required by NRC to install barriers, bulletproof security stations and other physical modifications which in the USA are estimated by the industry association to have cost some $2 billion across the country.

    See also Science magazine article 2002 and Appendix 3.

    Switzerland's Nuclear Safety Inspectorate studied a similar scenario and reported in 2003 that the danger of any radiation release from such a crash would be low for the older plants and extremely low for the newer ones.

    The conservative design criteria which caused most power reactors to be shrouded by massive containment structures with biological shield has provided peace of mind in a suicide terrorist context. Ironically and as noted earlier, with better understanding of what happens in a core melt accident inside, they are now seen to be not nearly as necessary in that accident mitigation role as was originally assumed.

    Link: http://www.world-nuclear.org/inform...-plants/safety-of-nuclear-power-reactors.aspx


    Broken Arrow type incidents highlighted in this link: http://www.atomicarchive.com/Almanac/Brokenarrows_static.shtml

    No Broken Arrow type incident in a long time.

    :what: ???

    Some fair points in this part of critic (well said), but nuclear proliferation is a dangerous game and global opinion began to shape and shift against this practice since the 1970s, giving rise to NTI movement.

    FYI: https://www.nti.org/

    Dr. Qadeer Khan failed to take cues from the implied shift (i.e. NTI movement) and came under fire consequently, and we should not make excuses for his proliferation activities in the light of this fact alone.

    Emotional rant not grounded in facts.

    "The United States began providing economic assistance along and military aid to Pakistan shortly after the country’s creation in 1947. In total, the United States obligated nearly $67 billion (in constant 2011 dollars) to Pakistan between 1951 and 2011."


    Link: https://www.cgdev.org/page/aid-pakistan-numbers

    The above is in addition to history of IMF bailouts for Pakistan's economy.

    By any measure, US and affiliated agencies, are among the largest donors to Pakistan in history. This group have kept Pakistan afloat through its most trying times, and this is happening even now.

    Yes, US and Pakistan do not have an ideal relationship dynamic, but this does not imply that US have attempted to ruin Pakistan. Bush administration had a golden opportunity to ruin Pakistan back in 2001 with aid of India but it honored its dealings with Pervez Musharraf - credit where due.

    India is certainly a problem for Pakistan - a view nobody denies.


    Pakistan is far from being a perfect society - INTROSPECTION is the need of the hour. This habit of blaming others for everything that is wrong in Pakistan is POINTLESS and CRASS. Potential critic should be sound and fair, particularly from educated folk.
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  6. Vortex


    Apr 17, 2008
    +3 / 2,801 / -1
    Very interesting and informative.
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  7. khanasifm

    khanasifm SENIOR MEMBER

    Apr 16, 2008
    +6 / 3,462 / -1
    In the Fourth Anglo-Mysore War, the imperial forces of the British East India Company were supported by the Nizam of Hyderabad and Marathas. They defeated Tipu, and he was killed on 4 May 1799 while defending his fort of Srirangapatna.

    Betrail of Muslim as usual