What's new

Pakistan boasted of nuclear strike on India within eight seconds

:woot::rofl::rofl: If that's the level of the intellectual ability of Pakistani generals, then I must pity the poor soldiers under them! Nuff said!

8 Seconds???? This is so much crap, it's not even funny! :blink: I'm outta here!

Well India's got no such technology that Pakistan possess. poor Hindis the only things they can do right now is see their missile fall immediately after take off & call that failed test a successful test, so then it's ok for you all hindis to laugh & tell your self lies. Poor hindis.
 
In 8 seconds, how come? its a veiled propaganda by west, itching for keeping the world on mercy of few interventionist powers.

If its true then its as absurd as Gen Kapoore remarks that his country can fight wars with Pakistan and China simultaneously and that India would finish Pakistan within 96 hours of a war.
One always wonders why its specifically 96 hours :lol:
 
Technically this is possible to launch all 100+ nukes in 5 seconds. We have multitube launchers.
Also it needs only 100-200 launchers or
25-40 mutitube launcher vehicle.
Just said Technically.
 
Bravo general , Then dont cry that you r not getting NSG waiver!!!
 
Pakistan could launch a nuclear strike on India within eight seconds, claimed an army general in Islamabad whose warning is described in the latest volume of Alastair Campbell's diaries.

The general asked Tony Blair's former communications director to remind India of Pakistan's nuclear capability amid fears in Islamabad that Delhi was "determined to take them out".

Britain became so concerned about Pakistan's threat that Blair's senior foreign policy adviser, Sir David Manning, later warned in a paper that Pakistan was prepared to "go nuclear".

The warnings are relayed by Campbell in a section in his latest diaries, The Burden of Power, which are being serialised in the Guardian on Saturday and Monday. The diaries start on the day of the 9/11 attacks and end with Campbell's decision to stand down in August 2003 after the Iraq war.

The nuclear warnings came during a visit by Blair to the Indian subcontinent after the 9/11 attacks in 2001. Campbell was told about the eight-second threat over a dinner in Islamabad on 5 October 2001 hosted by Pervez Musharraf, then Pakistan's president.

Campbell writes: "At dinner I was between two five-star generals who spent most of the time listing atrocities for which they held the Indians responsible, killing their own people and trying to blame 'freedom fighters'. They were pretty convinced that one day there would be a nuclear war because India, despite its vast population and despite being seven times bigger, was unstable and determined to take them out.

"When the time came to leave, the livelier of the two generals asked me to remind the Indians: 'It takes us eight seconds to get the missiles over,' then flashed a huge toothy grin."

Blair visited Pakistan less than a month after the 9/11 attacks as Britain and the US attempted to shore up support in Islamabad before the bombing of Afghanistan, which started on 7 October 2001. Campbell writes that the Pakistani leadership seemed to be keen for Britain and the US to capture Osama bin Laden, though he added it was difficult to be sure.

Relations between Islamabad and Delhi plummeted after the Blair visit when terrorists attacked the Indian parliament on 13 December 2001, killing seven people. Five of the attackers died.

India blamed Pakistan-based militants for the attack by Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed terror groups fighting Indian rule in Kashmir. The tensions became so great that Richard Armitage, the US deputy secretary of state, was sent to the region in May 2002.

Blair returned to the Indian subcontinent in January 2002, shortly after the fall of the Taliban in Afghanistan, amid one of the tensest nuclear standoffs between Indian and Pakistan since independence in 1947.

In the preparations for the visit, Manning prepared a paper for Blair that warned of the real threat of a nuclear conflict. In an extract from his diaries for 4 January 2002, Campbell wrote: "DM had a paper, making clear our belief that the Pakistanis would 'go nuclear' and if they did, that they wouldn't be averse to unleashing them on a big scale. TB was genuinely alarmed by it and said to David 'They wouldn't really be prepared to go for nuclear weapons over Kashmir would they?' DM said the problem was there wasn't a clear understanding of strategy and so situations tended to develop and escalate quickly, and you couldn't really rule anything out."

A few days after the visit, the India-Pakistan standoff was discussed by the British war cabinet. In an extract for his diaries on 10 January 2002, Campbell wrote: "CDS [chief of the defence staff Admiral Sir Michael Boyce] said if India and Pakistan go to war, we will be up the creek without a paddle. Geoff [Hoon] said there may have to be limited compulsory call-up of Territorial Army reserves. TB gave a pretty gloomy assessment re India/Pakistan, said [the Indian prime minister Atal Bihari] Vajpayee was really upset at the way [Pakistan's president] Musharraf treated him. Military dispositions remained the same, with more than a million troops there [in Kashmir]. He assessed that the Indians believed that they could absorb 500,000 deaths. Pakistani capability was far greater than the Indians believed."

Relations between Delhi and Islamabad have eased in recent years, though they still remain tense because Delhi believes that elements in the Pakistan state encourage Kashmiri terror groups. During his first visit to India in 2010 David Cameron famously accused Pakistan of exporting terrorism.

Campbell also relays another nuclear threat a year later when George Bush told Blair he feared that Ariel Sharon, the former Israeli prime minister, was planning to launch a nuclear attack against Iraq. In an account of a conversation with Bush at a Nato summit in Prague in November 2002, as diplomatic pressure intensified on Saddam Hussein, Campbell writes: "[George Bush] felt that if we got rid of Saddam, we could make progress on the Middle East. He reported on some of his discussions with [Ariel] Sharon, and said he had been pretty tough with him. Sharon had said that if Iraq hit Israel, their response would 'escalate' which he took to mean go nuclear. Bush said he said to him 'You will not, you will not do that, it would be crazy.' He said he would keep them under control, adding 'A nuke on Baghdad, that could be pretty tricky.'"

Pakistan boasted of nuclear strike on India within eight seconds | World news | guardian.co.uk

Five star generals? How many five star generals were there in the whole world, let alone India/Pakistan, at that time....hmm........BS???
 
Magazine - A Modest Proposal From the Brigadier - The Atlantic

WHAT ONE PROMINENT PAKISTANI THINKS HIS COUNTRY SHOULD DO WITH ITS ATOMIC WEAPONS

By Peter Landesman
In the center of the biggest traffic circle of every major city in Pakistan sits a craggy, Gibraltarish replica of a nameless peak in the Chagai range. This mountain is the home of Pakistan's nuclear test site. The development, in 1998, of the "Islamic Bomb," intended as a counter to India's nuclear capability, is Pakistan's only celebrated achievement since its formation, in 1947. The mountain replicas, about three stories tall, are surrounded by flower beds that are lovingly weeded, watered, and manicured. At dusk, when the streetlights come on, so do the mountains, glowing a weird molten yellow.

Islamabad's monument to the atomic bomb occupies a rotary between the airport and the city center. Nearby stand models of Pakistan's two classes of missile: Shaheen and Ghauri. The Islamabad nuclear shrine stands at a place where the city is dissolving into an incoherent edge town of shabby strip malls and empty boulevards and rows of desolate government buildings. A little farther in one comes to the gridded blocks of gated homes. The neighborhoods are called sectors. The streets are numbered, not named.

Late last year, after nearly two months in Pakistan, I paid the last of many visits to house No. 8 on street 19, sector F-8/2, a modern white mansion known as Zardari House. The house has been used by Asif Ali Zardari, the imprisoned husband of Benazir Bhutto, Pakistan's exiled former Prime Minister. Neither Zardari nor Bhutto has been there for a long time. Zardari has been confined for five years, most recently in Attock Fort, a medieval fortress perched over the Indus River between Islamabad and Peshawar. He is charged with a slew of crimes: large-scale corruption; conspiracy in the murder of Bhutto's brother Mir Murtaza; conspiracy to smuggle narcotics. Bhutto, who also faces corruption charges in Pakistan, lives in Dubai with their three children. Pakistan's leader, General Pervez Musharraf, has promised to have her arrested and tried if she ever returns to Pakistan. Outside the gate to the empty Zardari House sits a man with his back to the wall, a sawed-off shotgun across his knees.

I had been going there to consult with Brigadier Amanullah, known to his friends as Aman. Aman, in his early fifties and now retired, is lithe and gentle-natured and seemed to me slightly depressed. He works in a small office behind Zardari House, where, as the secretary to Benazir Bhutto in Islamabad, he coordinates Bhutto's efforts to return to Pakistan and regain its prime ministership. He also keeps in close touch with old colleagues, who include many powerful people in Pakistan. Aman was once the chief of Pakistan's military intelligence in Sind Province, which borders India. Pakistan's biggest city and a cultural center, Karachi, is in Sind. That put Aman squarely in the middle of things, his finger near many sorts of buttons. Today Aman is believed to act as Bhutto's liaison with the armed forces, and he maintains contacts with serving army officers, including senior generals. When I wanted to speak to someone in the Pakistani government, I asked Aman. When I wanted to speak to someone in the Taliban, or in military intelligence, or in the political opposition, I asked Aman. His replies were mumbled and monosyllabic. He never offered opinions. He would simply hear me out and, most times, tip his head and say, "Why not?" Within an hour after Aman and I parted, I would receive a phone call from his secretary. References would be made to "that man" or "that matter," and I would be given a phone number and a time to call. Having spoken with Aman, I was always expected.

On the day of my final visit Aman seemed more sullen than usual. He ushered me into a room adjoining the office. The room was long and spare. There was an oil painting on the far wall. The other walls were empty and lined with cushioned chairs. Aman sat across from me. We had tea and spoke about the latest events.

As we were wrapping up our conversation, I looked at the oil painting. It was a strange picture, a horizontal landscape about four feet across, with overtones of socialist realism. In the foreground a youthful Benazir Bhutto stood in heroic pose on an escarpment overlooking the featureless grid of Islamabad. Beside her stood her father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, a Prime Minister who in 1977 was ousted in a coup and two years later hanged. On the other side of Bhutto was Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the long-dead founding father of Pakistan. Their postures were exalted, their expressions a combination of pride and awe. Jinnah's arm pointed to the vast plain beyond the city, where a rocket was lifting out of billowing clouds of vapor and fire into the sky.

Aman noticed me looking at the painting and followed my gaze. I asked him if Benazir Bhutto had commissioned it, and Aman said no. He told me that one day when she was still Prime Minister, an unknown man, an ordinary Pakistani citizen, had come to the gate of Zardari House with the picture and told Aman that he'd painted it for the Prime Minister and wanted to present it to her as a gift. Aman said that he was immediately transfixed by the painting. He called to Bhutto inside the house, but she refused to come down to see the man. Aman was persistent, and eventually she came down.

"I insisted Benazir accept it as a gift," Aman told me.

We both looked up at the painting in silence. "A rocket ship heading to the moon?" I asked.

Aman tipped his head to the side. A smirk tugged at the corners of his mouth. "No," he said. "A nuclear warhead heading to India."

I thought he was making a joke. Then I saw he wasn't. I thought of the shrines to Pakistan's nuclear-weapons site, prominently displayed in every city. I told Aman that I was disturbed by the ease with which Pakistanis talk of nuclear war with India.

Aman shook his head. "No," he said matter-of-factly. "This should happen. We should use the bomb."

"For what purpose?" He didn't seem to understand my question. "In retaliation?" I asked.

"Why not?"

"Or first strike?"

"Why not?"

I looked for a sign of irony. None was visible. Rocking his head side to side, his expression becoming more and more withdrawn, Aman launched into a monologue that neither of us, I am sure, knew was coming:

"We should fire at them and take out a few of their cities—Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta," he said. "They should fire back and take Karachi and Lahore. Kill off a hundred or two hundred million people. They should fire at us and it would all be over. They have acted so badly toward us; they have been so mean. We should teach them a lesson. It would teach all of us a lesson. There is no future here, and we need to start over. So many people think this. Have you been to the villages of Pakistan, the interior? There is nothing but dire poverty and pain. The children have no education; there is nothing to look forward to. Go into the villages, see the poverty. There is no drinking water. Small children without shoes walk miles for a drink of water. I go to the villages and I want to cry. My children have no future. None of the children of Pakistan have a future. We are surrounded by nothing but war and suffering. Millions should die away."

"Pakistan should fire pre-emptively?" I asked.

Aman nodded.

"And you are willing to see your children die?"

"Tens of thousands of people are dying in Kashmir, and the only superpower says nothing," Aman said. "America has sided with India because it has interests there." He told me he was willing to see his children be killed. He repeated that they didn't have any future—his children or any other children.

I asked him if he thought he was alone in his thoughts, and Aman made it clear to me that he was not.

"Believe me," he went on, "If I were in charge, I would have already done it."

Aman stopped, as though he'd stunned even himself. Then he added, with quiet forcefulness, "Before I die, I hope I should see it."


This article available online at:

Magazine - A Modest Proposal From the Brigadier - The Atlantic

It sounds like a "good" made up lie by the British guy; how come this general Aman (the name of the Israeli military intelligence!!!) never said a word(on very ordinary Pakistani things) as stated early in the article and all of a sudden he starts making statements of nuclear war and destruction of India and Pakistan in the same token (sounds extremely childish and amateurish made up story).
The worst part of it all is that Indian members swallow the story wholeheartedly, showing to the whole world how child like their brains are and how much the Brits and others know their mentality and can influence it in a blink of an eye.
stupidity is the danger for India and its man made foes who have to fight to protect themselves from gullible ignorant and wannabes intelligent people.
It is too bad that even a stupid Brit can do all this damage by fabricating a novellish story and having it digested by concerned although too blind -by arrogance and ignorance- people.
No insults are intended on my part, but it is very sad to see how low educated and world affairs inconscientious the Hindus are, and blaming others for their low capacity of facing real jackals wanting their destruction to keep selling arms, even at the cost of a billion people they won't care as long as they survive; (since they think that the laws of the jungle apply to humans in general, and the survival of the fittest, -in this case- the fittest brains or so they think is the most potent thought). Even at the cost of millions or billions of others lives. They have just forgotten one principle and that is:
Ones freedom ends at where another's freedom begins.
 
Anyone got more popcorn? I just finished mine..

What's with all the bogus speculations lately?
Yet another talk about nuking one another, sheer stupidity.

Why the f** would we want to infest the common Indian with nuclear radiation, and on the other side, why would they want to nuke us?

The people higher in command always look at it from the top, see us as peons, as assets, risk versus reward, and we *** the masses get excited of hearing this news, but be warned, when the s-h-i-t hits the fan and all hell breaks loose, it is indeed these same generals and officials who are first to make a run for it.
 
you outta here???
you cant leave man, admit it you are obsessed with Pakistan and Pakistanis. I know back in college days some of the indians hated their group so much they only hung out with Pakistani...you are one of them, you cant leave us!!
Ok, I ain't leavin'!! :no: I actually love MOST Pakistanis! But some from the Jamaat suck! And most of these guys would love to destroy India even if Kashmir is handed over to you on a platter! :P

By the way, I have some of my best friends as Pakistanis especially in Europe and we all have a ball whenever we get together. AND NO ONE TALKS OF DESTROYING INDIA!! But some guys here on PDF need to remove their anti India virus from their hard discs in their brains! I mean they urgently require a complete reformatting!! :whistle: :lol:
 
Could be. DHL works amazingly well in Asia.

BTW, the keyword is 'boasted', as in Sheikhchilli.
 
Well that was sometime ago it may be quicker and more devastating now
slap.gif
Any quicker and it'll blow the launcher, the launch pad, and take part of Pakistan itself into that god-almighty mushroom cloud!
shootme.gif
Too quick is a bad idea, what?
lol-042.gif
 
Indian Intellectual capability showing now....Let's have more common sense here please... This specific reply was discussing how general conduct themselves on media and it was a reply to someone who was laughing like hell that Pakistani generals are saying these things to journalists while in comparison i showed how Indian Generals conduct themselves in media.

Why are you discussing their war time strategies and other screwups?

Of all the indians posting in this thread, this post takes the cake 8 second nuke has taken more toll on your mental capability and has affected your comprehension capabilities too... Chill out mate, we will take 60 seconds to nuke you, Now happy?

Why 60 Secs take two secs if it makes you happy. The issue is what happens then ?

Retaliation will be swift and complete. With sea and under sea platforms available there will be no place to hide. Anyway this is in the realm of school boy fantasies.

The larger part is that the Pak General violated a very basic premise which those who wield power are expected to remain within - not to open your mouth at the wrong place and boast unnecessarily.

There is nothing he said one does not aleady know orhas not catered for.

As regards finding fault with war time strategies, last when I checked Generals were paid for doing a good job here & thats where Pak Generals have consistently failed.

They are extremely great at Politics, manipulation, pulling the carpet from under the feet, biting the hand that feeds them...
 
Back
Top Bottom