Nuclear Pakistan has destabilising effects: US expert

[Nefarious]

'Destabilising effects' otherwise known as 'asses on fire'.

 

[risingsinga]

Oh I didn't notice that it was an Indian dood trying to pretend as an American girl Ashley wrote this article....so it is again an Indian bad-mouthing Pakistan...I'm too familiar with this hysterical rants of theirs...

 

[The Sandman]

******* indians as usual....

View attachment 307045

"US Expert" bwahahaha naam bhi larkion wala lakh di lanat
awesome work brother

 

[BRAVO_]

Obama At Nuclear Summit: India, Pakistan Should Reduce Nuclear Threat

Washington : Just a day after the show of solidarity with India's Prime Minister at the White House Dinner, US President Barack Obama said India and Pakistan both need to reduce the subcontinent's serious nuclear threat.

At the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, President Obama said "we need to see progress in Pakistan and India" and "make sure that as they develop military doctrines that they are not continually moving in the wrong direction."

so it goes both way ...

 

[Thorough Pro]

Let us see, nuclear attacks on Japan, proposal of nuclear attack on Iran, Attack on Korea, Attack on Vietnam, Unsuccessful attack on Iran, attack on Libyan planes, attack on milk plant in Sudan, Attack on Iraq, Attack on Afghanistan, Again attack on Iraq, Attack on Libya, Attack on Syria, Attack on Pakistan border post, attack on Abbotabad in Pakistan, multiple Drone attacks in Pakistan................and who is destabilising the world?

Nuclear Pakistan has destabilising effects: US expert


Nuclear weapons in Pakistan's hands have "corrosively destabilising" effects in the region and provide a license for the country's sub-conventional wars against India, a top American expert has said.

"Unfortunately nuclear weapons in Pakistani hands have had larger and more corrosively destabilising effects: they have enabled Pakistan to pursue its revanchist aims of recovering the disputed state of Jammu and Kashmir by force, or more specifically, by unleashing state-supported terrorism against India in the hope of weakening Indian control over the contested territories," said Ashley Tellis from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

In an interview to The Cipher Brief, Tellis said this stratagem is based on the assumption that India will be unable to retaliate against Pakistan conventionally for fear of sparking a nuclear holocaust.

"Pakistan's nuclear weapons, then, are intended not merely to provide deterrence against Indian attacks, but more ambitiously, a license for Pakistan's sub-conventional wars against India," Tellis said in response to a question.

"This behaviour, flowing from Pakistan's possession of nuclear weapons, is what makes deterrence in South Asia more unstable than it would otherwise be— if Pakistan's strategic objectives were as conservative as India's," he said.

© pti Pakistan's Shaheen II nuclear-capable missile. In terms of estimated warhead production, Pakistan can produce anywhere from 14-27 warheads annually, whereas India can only produce 2-5 warheads per year (Source: AP Photo)
This dynamic, in its totality, suggests that India's approach to nuclear deterrence is closer to that of the United States: both nations view their nuclear weapons primarily as deterrents against nuclear attacks by others, he observed.

"Pakistan's behaviour, however, exemplifies nuclear coercion rather than simply deterrence: to that degree, it mimics Russian behaviour more than it does the US practice of deterrence," Tellis said.

In a separate paper, Will Edwards, International Producer with The Cipher Brief, said Pakistan has long viewed nuclear weapons as a hedge against Indian aggression in disputed territories and a counterweight to India's conventional military superiority.


The difference is that now Pakistan has chosen to outstrip India's nuclear forces by drastically increasing fissile materials production and to employ smaller, tactical nuclear devices in a bid to counteract India's widening conventional supremacy, he wrote.

Currently, Pakistan out produces India in fissile material at a ratio of 4:1.

In terms of estimated warhead production, Pakistan can produce anywhere from 14-27 warheads annually, whereas India can only produce 2-5 warheads per year, he said.

http://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world...-effects-us-expert/ar-BBtvoRI?ocid=spartandhp

 

[AhsanAmin]

There should be a consensus among a lot of good humans that nuclear weapons that cause death at such a huge scale are in fact really bad. I am very sure most humans would agree with me. But I will like to tell friends we have enough evil humans in this world who would follow the above idea with great lip service so as to make themselves look good but will have no intention whatsoever of ending the nuclear weapons on earth.

My question is why can we not have a global consensus to completely end stockpiles of nuclear weapons? Most Pakistanis would make this suggestion that we would be willing to end all our nuclear weapons if India does the same. I am sure this would be greeted by a lot of countries but then there would be Indian quibbles that Pakistan is not our only enemy in the region, we also have a threat from nuclear China and we would not be willing to end our stockpiles of nuclear weapons.

There has to be an end of nuclear weapons, and it has to be completely global and it must be implemented on every country alike. When an American nuclear bomb would be used, it will kill the same number of innocent humans in some target population center as Indian or Pakistani bomb. And if you are so responsible as you claim that you would really never use the bomb, then why not actually destroy the bomb.

I think the greatest problem is the hypocrisy of imperial nations who keep pointing fingers at nuclear weapons everywhere but do not want to end their own stockpiles of nuclear weapons that can destroy the life on earth more than hundred times all over again. If there is a consensus that nuclear weapons are bad then why do some nations think that they are the ones who have the sole right to keep these nuclear weapons of mass destruction.

This is a serious problem in mentality of several nations. Americans might for example say that China is spending so much money on nuclear and other similar weapons but they have no moral authority over China since they want to stop China from developing better nuclear weapons but they in fact want to modernize their own American stockpile of nuclear weapons of mass destruction. This hypocritical, myopic, short-sighted, and double standard attitude of nations who claim to be intelligent in fact fuels nuclear and arms races and continues to threaten and destabilize the humanity on planet earth.

This is a serious problem with humanity in general since science has advanced at a far greater pace while good morals and ethics in human beings especially related to regard and empathy for other humans, have not become as better when compared to sharp increase in scientific knowledge. If we, as humans, do not do something about better ethics in humans in general, and translate these better ethics into more empathy and better understanding between nations, these problems related to nuclear and other unconventional weapons would continue to become a greater nightmare.

I would suggest that let us all nations decide that nuclear weapons are universally bad, and leave this hypocritical and short-sighted moronic attitude that they are the ones who need to have better and more advanced weapons of mass destruction, while their rivals are asked to stop developing such weapons. There would be an end to weapons of mass destruction only when every nation would think intelligently and leave this myopic attitude and decide to end nuclear weapons of mass destruction everywhere including in their own country. I really think that all nations should sit together and make a planned time table to completely end certain kind of weapons of mass destruction especially those intended to kill civilian populations.

 

[Dr Shaheryar]

This has to start from USA AND RUSSIA. They are brothers in arm. Go google there number of ICBM'S, SLBM'S. China UK , France, Israel, India and Pakistan combine doesn't match their equals. And they talk about proliferation.

 

[Jaam92]

******* indians as usual....

View attachment 307045

Ary sala E to Wrong Number Nikla

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

******* indians as usual....

View attachment 307045

Paid reports, originating from the only country that has used a nuclear weapon. Plays on deaf years.

 

[JOEY TRIBIANI]

Hayee ye to wanna be goraa nikla ugly neighbor ..

 

[T-Rex]

Currently, Pakistan out produces India in fissile material at a ratio of 4:1.

In terms of estimated warhead production, Pakistan can produce anywhere from 14-27 warheads annually, whereas India can only produce 2-5 warheads per year, he said.





But i thought India has More Nuclear Plants then Pakistan? NO?

What's the source of this information? Even if it is true what's the relevance of this factor to what the US experts are saying?

Ashley Tellis from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, why your yanki doodle arse is on fire, we are using our capabilities against our declared and known mortal enemy, not against you lot.

Well, it shows once more that Pakistan has one very powerful undeclared mortal enemy though some of uncle sam's friends on this forum bray like a donkey that india is Pakistan's only enemy.

 

[Taimoor Khan]

Well, it shows once more that Pakistan has one very powerful undeclared mortal enemy though some of uncle sam's friends on this forum bray like a donkey that india is Pakistan's only enemy.

Yea, there is no shortage of fools among us.

But to be honest, its not America as country which acts as hostile to Pakistan , and who propping India up against us. It is those people who control America from behind the scene who hate Pakistan with passion. America is a juggernaut but without any Captian in charge. Its is remotely controlled however. And those who got control are hiding in a very tiny room and moving the juggernaut over Muslim lands one by one trampling them over, cheering each other. They could have trampled Pakistan long ago as well but unfortunately for them, Pakistan know where they are and can destroy that little room they are hiding in. That is the reason they are propping India up as a sacrificial lamb in a hope that in a conflict with India, Pakistan will be damaged beyond repair and that is when they can make their move.

 

[Neutron]

Well Nuclear India has destabilising effect as india occupied kashmir by use of violent force

 

[T-Rex]

Yea, there is no shortage of fools among us.

But to be honest, its not America as country which acts as hostile to Pakistan , and who propping India up against us. It is those people who control America from behind the scene who hate Pakistan with passion. America is a juggernaut but without any Captian in charge. Its is remotely controlled however. And those who got control are hiding in a very tiny room and moving the juggernaut over Muslim lands one by one trampling them over, cheering each other. They could have trampled Pakistan long ago as well but unfortunately for them, Pakistan know where they are and can destroy that little room they are hiding in. That is the reason they are propping India up as a sacrificial lamb in a hope that in a conflict with India, Pakistan will be damaged beyond repair and that is when they can make their move.

Even a fool cannot be blind to uncle sam's intentions as far as Pakistan is concerned, so it's wrong to say that they are fools. They have vested interest in the US and that's more important to them. They commit this treachery by waving the Pakistani flag. As for india, they are too clever to be used as a sacrificial lamb, assrahell tried it but failed. So, it's unlikely that uncle sam will succeed and the Americans are well aware of it. Therefore, the likelihood of a direct US strike against the Pakistani nuclear sites has become an existential threat to Pakistan.

 

[Bossman]

"In an interview to The Cipher Brief, Tellis said this stratagem is based on the assumption that India will be unable to retaliate against Pakistan conventionally for fear of sparking a nuclear holocaust"


Source: https://defence.pk/threads/nuclear-...ising-effects-us-expert.432283/#ixzz49yR5JAL3

Despite the negative headlines this article is in fact positive for Pakistan and we should thanks Indians for posting it. The article is basically saying that Indian conventional military advantage is neutered and India cannot do $hit about Pakistan.