New Recruit
? Didn't you just say if a super power attacks Pakistan they will seize to exist .
Who needs certificates from idiots like you to be a nuclear power. We are a nuclear power, we know this reality causes so much pain in your as.....s but face the hard reality.
Typical butt hurt indian with his oral masturbation.
USA attack Afghanistan, Vietnam, Iraq and many others in last 6 decades and all these countries are still there despite not being nuclear power.
New Recruit
Wtf kind of retarded logic is that ? India is the 4th biggest electricity producer in the world , with that kind of power production , it wouldn't matter India had 100 nuclear reactors .
K , enjoy the ban .
Funny that history says otherwise .
This figure can't possibly be true.
I think it was about 15% or so of GDP for fy 2015-16
Nope it is not, nor has it ever been that high.
Yeah, India may have larger stocks of fissile material, may steal even more of that, and produce more bombs. But USSR had similar superiority over US/Europe during the cold war. India is much weaker internally where nuke scientists/engineers are more vulnerable than in any other country. Nuke material are routinely reported for being stolen in India. Members of a few insurgencies (out of dozens of active insurgencies) in India can resort to acquiring and using nuke material against Indian state. US better worry more for the safety of Indian nuke assets rather than talking non-sense about Pak nuke program. We are not in nuke race with Indians. Our nukes are meant purely for our defense and we know how to inflict massive destruction on the enemy if case of any aggression against us.
In an editorial published on November 7, the American daily said Islamabad’s competition with India, “which is adding to its own nuclear arsenal, is a losing game”. At present, Pakistan is spending about 25 per cent of its budget on defence. Reining in its nuclear operations would be in the country’s long-term interest, the editorial said. “It cannot provide adequate services for its citizens” because of the huge allocation for defence.
Pakistan’s official position is that it needs more nuclear weapons to counter India’s conventional arsenal. It’s expected to become the world’s third largest nuclear power with as many as 120 warheads, behind the U.S. and Russia.
Last month, Pakistan Foreign Secretary Aizaz Chaudhary had told a news briefing in Washington that Islamabad had built low-yield nuclear weapons, or tactical nuclear weapons, “to counter Indian aggression”. Such weapons “are more likely to be used in a conflict with India and could more easily fall into the hands of terrorists…,” added the editorial.
The NYT has also urged the U.S. to keep trying to reach a deal with Pakistan aimed at reining in its nuclear programme.
“The major world powers spent two years negotiating an agreement to restrain the nuclear ambitions of Iran, which doesn’t have a single nuclear weapon. Yet there has been no comparable investment of effort in Pakistan, which, along with India, has so far refused to consider any limits at all.”
The Obama administration has begun talks with Islamabad in this regard. But a nuclear deal similar to the one with India is not on the cards. American officials “are discussing what Pakistan needs to do to justify American support for its membership in the 48-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group, which governs trade in nuclear fuel and technology.”
At present, Pakistan is not an internationally recognised nuclear power. The father of the country’s nuclear weapons programme, A.Q. Khan, has been accused of providing nuclear technologies to countries such as North Korea and Iran.
Recently, former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani had said in an interview that Tehran had received nuclear centrifuges from Pakistan.
It is worth noting that the NYT editorial comes at a time when tensions are running high between India and Pakistan. The editorial also criticises Prime Minister Narendra Modi for not doing anything “to engage Islamabad on security issues, and he also bears responsibility for current tensions
Contrary to the popular belief, Russian nuclear arsenal and capability is nowhere near as impressive as it seems to be on paper.@Hyperion
Just a thought came in my mind..
How the hell Russia with her 1.1 trillion economy (nominal) is able to create and maintain a credible nuclear deterrence against United States with thousands of nuclear warheads, diversified delivery systems, MIRVed weapons, and what not?
If Russkies can do it, why can't the rest of world such as India, Pakistan, and so on? ( I know Russians have been way more advanced but I'm talking about the situation in next few decades)...
I don't recall any country doing something significant to stop our nuclear program.
Its bad when one of its articles doesn't gives pro-Pakistani vibe. It will be good when one of its articles will give anti-Indian vibe. This is all subjective.
