What's new

Pakistan can defend its nuclear arsenal: US Secretary of State

I dont know why America and its western poodles keep on bitching about Pakistan.

This is what is going on in India right now as we speak!

Nuclear leak in Gujarat may be more serious than the Indian government is claiming - World - DAWN.COM


They are rewarding India with nuclear deals. Its like giving monkey a gun, where there is a strong chance that it will shoot itself. Joke aside, it a very serious issue for Pakistan. India might not care about its population but these nuclear leaks which are now reported more often, can easily cause contamination over Pakistani population centers. Gujrat is just next door to us!
 
.
,
It's not the U.S. "dictating". It's the non-proliferation treaty Iran signed decades ago: link. Iran gets nuclear technology but forswore the right to build or possess nuclear weapons.
Well the NPT is oppressive and against the right of smaller nations to defend themselves from unprovoked aggression. If US is serious about this nuke thing they should first destroy their stockpile which is the second largest. But no one is serious about this. All it has become is a vendetta to have a few select states like Iran not have nuclear weapons. These states will seek nukes though because that is the only way to bridge the security/technological gap. They can threaten to use the nuke for their safety assured security because no one wants to risk nuclear war. Look what happened to Libya when they gave up nukes. Nukes are safeguard for my nation and other nations that have sought to find them.

Personally I have no issue with an Iran with nukes. All this stinks of western biases. The countries demanding them not to have nukes have the largest stockpiles. On the other hand there are tolerated nuclear states like Israel. None of their enemies has nukes and when one tries to develop one they are isolated like Iran.
 
.
Well the NPT is oppressive and against the right of smaller nations to defend themselves from unprovoked aggression.
Pakistan is not a signatory.

If US is serious about this nuke thing they should first destroy their stockpile which is the second largest.
The agreement was that in exchange the superpowers would reduce their stockpiles and they have done so.

But no one is serious about this. All it has become is a vendetta -
So your position is that it should have been obvious to everyone that Iran was treating the treaty as a joke.

Personally I have no issue with an Iran with nukes. All this stinks of western biases.
I think most lawful restrictions do strike you that way, yes.

On the other hand there are tolerated nuclear states like Israel.
Israel is not a signatory, but Iran is.

None of their enemies has nukes and when one tries to develop one they are isolated like Iran.
So if policemen have guns you believe their enemies, the criminals, should be armed as well. Aren't you nice?
 
.
I dont know why America and its western poodles keep on bitching about Pakistan.

This is what is going on in India right now as we speak!

Nuclear leak in Gujarat may be more serious than the Indian government is claiming - World - DAWN.COM


They are rewarding India with nuclear deals. Its like giving monkey a gun, where there is a strong chance that it will shoot itself. Joke aside, it a very serious issue for Pakistan. India might not care about its population but these nuclear leaks which are now reported more often, can easily cause contamination over Pakistani population centers. Gujrat is just next door to us!
I agree. The US-India nuclear deal is akin to US accepting India's nuclear status. The refusal to provide us a similar deal proves they are acting against the balance of power in the region.

Pakistan is not a signatory.

The agreement was that in exchange the superpowers would reduce their stockpiles and they have done so.

So your position is that it should have been obvious to everyone that Iran was treating the treaty as a joke.

I think most lawful restrictions do strike you that way, yes.

Israel is not a signatory, but Iran is.

So if policemen have guns you believe their enemies, the criminals, should be armed as well. Aren't you nice?
You logic is deeply flawed. The law is biased against smaller states seeking to defend themselves. I would not expect you to understand but biased laws like the NPT are meant to be broken-for example the blasphemy law which has been used intensively in my country to frame my countrymen-mostly christians and liberals. The law was a child of Zia Ul Haq whom US supported.

Accepting the law is giving legitimacy to an evil and this is the same thing here. Israel has nukes and is the only nuclear power in the Middle East. Your defense of Israel is making you blind. It is not a lawful or fair restriction. If US can have nukes while being the only country to have used them in a genocide in hiroshima and nagasaki weaker countries trying to defend themselves should too.
 
.
You logic is deeply flawed. The law is biased against smaller states seeking to defend themselves. I would not expect you to understand but biased laws like the NPT are meant to be broken-for example the blasphemy law which has been used intensively in my country to frame my countrymen-mostly christians and liberals. The law was a child of Zia Ul Haq whom US supported.
You are confusing a biased treaty entered willingly with benefits and restrictions and handicaps accepted by its parties with abuse of a coercive law. Clever, but the abuser of the NPT are those who break the treaty, not those who follow it; THAT is the "evil".
 
.
You are confusing a biased treaty entered willingly with benefits and restrictions and handicaps accepted by its parties with abuse of a coercive law. Clever, but the abuser of the NPT are those who break the treaty, not those who follow it; THAT is the "evil".
You are an arrogant and typical American. There is no point arguing with a person who not only supports the status qou but argues for dis balance of power. It is as simple as this. If India Pakistan and Israel can have nukes so should Iran have the right.
 
.
If you don't count the incidents during production and the A.Q. Khan sales network, maybe. Who would know, given Pakistani secrecy on the subject?
The sole reason why the world has come to the poop level is because of people like us believing every poop that is fed to their brains. Anything that the media reports becomes bible.

The mention of AQ khan 'sales network' as an evidence of "a-c-c-i-d-e-n-t-a-l" leakage proves how much time you actually spend on the media. Even if a fraction of it you had used in silence your common sense would have guided you to a far more reasonable and rational take on the subject. The country that successfully hid the nuclear program from CIA, Mossad, Raw and what not got duped by a nuclear scientist who headed the black market sale of the most guarded secret in the country. He also duped the C-130 pilots into believing that he was shifting furniture to XYZ and not the nuclear bombs. He also went past all security checks and multi tiered security protocols and carried the nuclear plant on his shoulders and dashed to xyz. Give me a break man!

The truth and the bottom line is: There had been NO A-C-C-I-D-E-N-T-A-L leakage and hence the program is SAFE. Any leakage, if at all any, had been done in line with the best interests of Pakistan. Probably similar to what US has done in Israel's case. And with the level of media coverage world over, it is foolish to believe that the nuclear leakage could stay hidden, if it ever happens.
 
.
You are an arrogant and typical American. There is no point arguing with a person who not only supports the status qou but argues for dis balance of power. It is as simple as this. If India Pakistan and Israel can have nukes so should Iran have the right.
Except that unlike Pakistan and Israel, Iran actually signed a treaty disavowing any right to develop them.

Perhaps it's a quirk of culture that you perceive this as "arrogance": I see you as a typical Pakistani, ever-resentful of formal agreements and laws that limit in any way freedom to pursue self-interest; authority is to be abused.. As I pointed out recently in another thread, this is why it would be a mistake for China to proceed with a formal written pact with Pakistan: the American experience is that sooner or later, formal obligations generate resentment from Pakistanis. Better to stick with what China is doing now: goodwill gestures and outright gifts that serve mutual interests, without formally committing Pakistanis to anything in return. (Of course, that will also mean Pakistan can never absolutely count on China as its friend in a crisis, but that's nothing new, either, and history suggests Pakistanis don't resent the Chinese for it at all.)
 
.
We know how to protect our nuclear arsenal an nuclear sites and nuclear research. We have trained a professional an efficient force to guard these facilities and they along with out intelligence forces also protect our nuclear scientists an researchers. There is no threat but the threat that their media would have the gullible public believe.

I agree and my government, apparently agrees. Pakistan's strategic forces are very professional and perfectly capable of safeguarding their arsenal. Pakistan has never threatened offensive nuclear strikes against anyone.
 
.
Except that unlike Pakistan and Israel, Iran actually signed a treaty disavowing any right to develop them.

Perhaps it's a quirk of culture that you perceive this as "arrogance": I see you as a typical Pakistani, ever-resentful of formal agreements and laws that limit in any way freedom to pursue self-interest; authority is to be abused.. As I pointed out recently in another thread, this is why it would be a mistake for China to proceed with a formal written pact with Pakistan: the American experience is that sooner or later, formal obligations generate resentment from Pakistanis. Better to stick with what China is doing now: goodwill gestures and outright gifts that serve mutual interests, without formally committing Pakistanis to anything in return. (Of course, that will also mean Pakistan can never absolutely count on China as its friend in a crisis, but that's nothing new, either, and history suggests Pakistanis don't resent the Chinese for it at all.)
China asks for nothing in return. America demands demands and demands. Until you people look within there can be no shift in American policy. Their people seem to be as brainwashed and self righteous as the leadership. Nothing good can come from war mongering. Remember that. People resent superpowers who bully and arm wrangle their way to the top.
 
. .
The US and Russia have reduced their Nukes from 50,000 to 1500???
Whadda Joke.
Last thing I heard regarding Nukes was that there are no more than 25K.

And where and how did they reduce them Nukes.
On Mars maybe.
No wait they gave them to Israel, the perfect way ta dispose them off.
 
.
The country that successfully hid the nuclear program from CIA, Mossad, Raw
They knew. Two factors helped Pakistan. First in those days (1970s) the smell of the colonial era was fresh. Racism and arrogance (which still is) was widespread and the many thought that Third Worlders like Pakistani were just upstarts who did not have the wherewithal to even begin making a nuclear device (this notion has been thoroughly disabused). This led to complacency on part of the West.

"1976 - Kissinger to Bhutto that the "US would make a horrible example’ of him over his refusal to give up the nuclear programme"

Source > A leaf from history: Kissinger comes to town - Newspaper - DAWN.COM
Source > Dancing with the Devil: The Perils of Engaging Rogue Regimes - Michael Rubin - Google Books

Second was the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. This gave Pakistan such leverage that she could just go along making the bomb while US would feign ignorance. This blanket protection lasted until the defeated Soviet troops left in late 1989 and soon US woke up and "discovered" Pak had nukes. Down came the hammer and sanctions. Everybody here knows the saga of embargoed F-16s etc.

So, with respect to you just because Pakistan outsmarted the West with the help of geostrategic circumstances prevalent at the time does not qualify the issue at hand in anyway.

On the question of how safe the nukes are most agree that it is reasonably safe. Indeed probably no more at risk of extremists grabbing them then say in US some far right group getting them. Pakistan military as a institution is well disciplined and with well proven history of unity of command. Call that a gift of the British era.

However the biggest single failure was without shred of doubt AQ.Khan. This concieted, self serving man with exceptional talent in selling himself as "Mr Bomb" when the truth is it took 1,000s of dedicated scientists decades to develop the bomb. Munir Ahmed Khan contributed more if not as much as AQ-K but the latter managed to get his face "photobombed" everywhere. His mastery at self publicity saw to it that he became the face of the "bomb".

The fact is that this montser sold for private gain secrets that belonged to the state. It was not his property the first place. However he went ahead driven by gread to sell Pakistan's assets to other countries in a private venture that directly put at risk the entire state of Pakistan. He was prepared to pawn the safety of entire Pakistan for few dollars more. I know of no more lowly person than that.

This is something that people in Pakistan who are apt to worship demons and crucify the saints (which explains the terrible state of the country) should do bit of retrospection. Imagine if one of the countries he sold the secrets to had developed a crude version and used it in MIddle East? The consequences are beyond thinking. Pakistan would have been erased from the map by the West. This traitor AQ-K did this for money. Later when everything came out he pretended to play the good jihadi by saying he was doing it for Islam. This would be like me breaking into National Bank of Pakistan and then when caught claiming I was taking the money so I could give it to Bayt Ul Mal to be distributed to the poor and needy Muslims. From minus zero I go to being plus hero.

The good thing is matters did eventually of sorts catch him. The bigger question that needed resolving was this matter private (AQ-K being AQ) or was the state involved. After considerably scrutiny the conclusion was it was just AQ being a privateer and a gangster. Quests were asked how was this possible. Very easy in Pakistan. Once Aq-K made his face synonymous with the bomb he was effectively a god amongst men. Pakstani culture s very prone to liftig people up to gods and then not asking any questions. In this culture AQ could do almost anything and nobody dared to question him.

However these issues have been addressed and authority over the nukes has been divested to a dedicated insitution that functions as organization than a property of one man. Therefore most observers (some with agendas will differ for obvious reasons) now regard Pak nukes to be safe as any other country. For those of showing some attributes of having logical thinking please read this article by the late great Ardeshir Cowasjee.

I know, I know Cowasjee was "a Indian" spy and on the payroll of RAW and thus discrediting the great Mr Bomb - this is ready made reply for some who regard AQ-K as messiah.

Source > The depths of degradation - Newspaper - DAWN.COM
 
Last edited:
.
The US and Russia have reduced their Nukes from 50,000 to 1500???
Whadda Joke.
Last thing I heard regarding Nukes was that there are no more than 25K.

And where and how did they reduce them Nukes.
On Mars maybe.
No wait they gave them to Israel, the perfect way ta dispose them off.

Uh, no. Russian and American nuclear arsenals were reduced and disposed of via two agreements signed between us; START 1 (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) & New START. START 1 reduced both country's total nuclear weapons arsenals by 80% and was in effect from 1991 to 2009. New START began in 2010 and will remain in effect until at least 2021. New START further reduced existing nuclear arsenals by another 50%. All reductions and destruction of weapons and delivery systems are monitored and verified by joint Russian-American teams. I.e., Russian weapons experts literally watch American weapons being destroyed along with delivery systems and vice versa.

Boeing-photos-of-Ground-Based-Interceptors-at-Vandenberg-Air-Force-Base.-Russian-officials-carried-out-a-secret-inspection-of-the-base-this-week..jpeg

Russian inspectors at an American facility.
 
.
Uh, no. Russian and American nuclear arsenals were reduced and disposed of via two agreements signed between us; START 1 (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) & New START. START 1 reduced both country's total nuclear weapons arsenals by 80% and was in effect from 1991 to 2009. New START began in 2010 and will remain in effect until at least 2021. New START further reduced existing nuclear arsenals by another 50%. All reductions and destruction of weapons and delivery systems are monitored and verified by joint Russian-American teams. I.e., Russian weapons experts literally watch American weapons being destroyed along with delivery systems and vice versa.

Boeing-photos-of-Ground-Based-Interceptors-at-Vandenberg-Air-Force-Base.-Russian-officials-carried-out-a-secret-inspection-of-the-base-this-week..jpeg

Russian inspectors at an American facility.

Indeed that is very true. However the impressive reduction (in % terms) does not change the fact that both Russia and USA continue to hold mountains of stockpiles making rest look like minnows. In case of USA every 40,000 Americans "own" a nuke and every 18,000 Russians proudly boast a nuke. There is probably less Ferrari's in Russia per head of population than nukes!

nuclear.jpg
 
.
Back
Top Bottom