Pakistan Should Produce More Nuclear Weapons If No F16's

[GlobalConflict]

If pakistan want F-16 then must have to pay

 

[PAFMAN]

Hi,

To shoot for the moon----you have to seek the stars----.

It was on the similar helicopter deal that I had made that proposal----. Take away from the thing that they control you with----and they will go crazy---take away the power that they have over you--and they will go mad---.

For that very reason---Paf should have taken those 18 J10C's last year---china was very willing----the deal would have been tremedous.

If the J10 has issues---trhe the paf should take care of them and make it better for both---themselves and for china as well.

They have done it many a times before with chinese aircraft---so what is stopping it now---?

@PAFMAN --- Paf is LYING about the J10---they just want to stay in their comfort zones and that is all---otherwise the J10C with aesa is an extremely potent aircraft---.

@MastanKhan , sir, PAF never says truth to their people, and flying j10 is really not a big deal,
I am wishing this shit f16 deal will be finished soon and i can bet with anyone here on this foram
whenever, PAF will go with next options US will offer f16 again and then you will see, they will again put their face on shit until they will face sanction.
Anyway, just can hope and nothing else.

 

[Dr Gupta]

Blackmail and putting a bullet to one's head is a sign of desperation. It will hardly put you in the good books of the Americans let alone get you entry into the NSG. I thought Pakistan was after a similar nuclear deal with the USA like India has?

 

[MastanKhan]

Blackmail and putting a bullet to one's head is a sign of desperation. It will hardly put you in the good books of the Americans let alone get you entry into the NSG. I thought Pakistan was after a similar nuclear deal with the USA like India has?

Hi,

Sir---you are putting a spin on it---there is no blackmail---. It is called us going our different ways---. Plain and simple.

 

[Dr Gupta]

Hi,

Sir---you are putting a spin on it---there is no blackmail---. It is called us going our different ways---. Plain and simple.

That road may lead to a dark tunnel my friend, concerns were raised during the last strategic meet you had with America regarding battlefield nukes. Pressing with this action could lead to dire consequences for the entire region.

 

[Pomegranate]

Hi,

Let the U S stop the sale----. Pakistan must increase the production of nuclear weapons by at least a 1000%.

So if the U S wants to cut off the conventional power base---no problem---let us increase the nuclear threshold---.

The U S senators think that they got us by the ball joints---that is fine---let us increase the threshold---let us take the number of nuclear weapons to 500 at least---and let us start serious production of ICBM's---and other missile systems---.

If the U S wants to play the game---that is fine----two can play it better---. Let us see who blinks first.

Finally a good thread ....

i just think " jo hota hai achay ke liye hota hai " now we can look for more options and we have now good relations with Russia too china is not going anywhere ... so that means we have nothing to worry about .

 

[MastanKhan]

That road may lead to a dark tunnel my friend, concerns were raised during the last strategic meet you had with America regarding battlefield nukes. Pressing with this action could lead to dire consequences for the entire region.

Hi,

You are correct that it might---. If our ballz are squeezed---then purpose is to have dire consequences for the entire region----and for those who are partners in creating this scenario.

 

[Dr Gupta]

Hi,

You are correct that it might---. If our ballz are squeezed---then purpose is to have dire consequences for the entire region----and for those who are partners in creating this scenario.

I thought that would be the case pushed into a corner you bite back right?

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

I've said this before and I will say it again. As a Pakistani, I'm not bothered about the indian, Afghan or other regional threat to us. Our overt and covert advanced and strategic weapons programs have virtually ensured us against them. There is one country that I'm concerned about and it's not india or israel. We have no adequate protection against that nation. We must somehow try to do the impossible and overcome this particular nation's threat. The people who control that nation have publically called for our destruction. They are the REAL enemy. Only 2 nations on the entire planet can fight them. Pakistan isn't one of them.

 

[Armstrong]

Well in that case, if you share we can probably overlook this transgression. Europe likes bribes.

But being serious for a second, Europe adheres to non-proliferation treaties - which also means punishing nuclear proliferators. Pakistan can build its own, but the moment it opens its nuclear program for sale it triggers all kinds of international red-lines.

If people here want to think Pakistan Stronk, Europe wouldn't dare... well, we f*cked up Iran for a few decades, so respect the precedent.

Forgive the puerile ramblings of some of my countrymen; as you can see that the equally infantile jingoism of our Indian neighbors brings out the worst and never the best in us and vice versa.

Our nukes exist wholly and solely to protect Pakistan and must never...ever...be used. Frankly the only reason I know that we have them is because our adversaries have them. Otherwise, in my opinion, any use of the nuke will be a crime against humanity no matter what rationalizations one comes up with and thus they must never be used...not even in the face of certain annihilation they must never...ever be used.

Too serious talk !

So how was your bakery delivery ?

No reply in the previous post....did I hit a raw nerve ?

I told you that your croquembouche looked like the Leaning Tower of Pisa but did you listen ?

 

[Mentee]

If they would have done that last year---and I told the heirarchy----earlier last year----get the J10C's the chinese want to give you---they said no---tried to explain it in many ways---but no---Khotay wali NO----.

It was the same NO---that the paf air marshall did not want to change his mind when told that the french won't deliver in the end----he did not want to believe that---till they said NO---and then he made all kinds of excuses---woh hamein nahin pata tha kay aisay hoga.

sir, it seems like a comedy of errors by the P.A.F,NO?

 

[litman]

pak should keep on producing tactica

Blackmail and putting a bullet to one's head is a sign of desperation. It will hardly put you in the good books of the Americans let alone get you entry into the NSG. I thought Pakistan was after a similar nuclear deal with the USA like India has?

it's not black mail. it's manipulation. every country has the right to look after her own interests. if we don;t get sufficient conventional weapons then we will and must increase the nuclear capability and BM tech to give a message to the enemy not to try any misadventure.

off topic but it's true that PAF is obsessed with tom cruise, F-16 and USAF

 

[Freyja]

Forget Europe,imagine how Russia or even China would feel about a state handing nuclear popsickles for pennies to every entity interested out there.

Great point. It's not just the US and Europe that'd be concerned about this. China and Russia already have one North Korea to worry about, do they really want another? Or a nation helping to facilitate the creation of one?

Of course not. Even without actually using the devices, they are politically and economically disruptive for a nation that possesses them. Sanctions, UN actions, political isolation, the kinds of nations that'd buy nukes from a North Korea or Ex-Soviet state - when they still had them - or Pakistan are the kinds that China's making good with at the moment and Russia has strong historical ties with... well, apart from Poland's more extreme elements anyway, but as if the US would even entertain the suggestion of leasing its nukes in such a way. And if Pakistan seeks to sell such weapons it could undo Russia and Chinese support or influence over those nations or make supporting them politically and economically costly

And beyond the political and economic considerations, I'm not even able to convince myself that certain nations wouldn't use the devices either. Could we trust either Sudan? Or some of the more instable nations in North Africa and the Middle-East? Aren't these the nations Pakistan counts itself friends with?

I can't say. But it's an unacceptable risk. Not just for Europe or the US, but for China, Russia and the greater region too.

Forgive the puerile ramblings of some of my countrymen; as you can see that the equally infantile jingoism of our Indian neighbors brings out the worst and never the best in us and vice versa.

I do forgive them, and enjoy poking both sides from time-to-time because of the jingoism that sprouts up. It's an irrational suggestions, selling nukes. But even building them to threaten nations in Europe or North America is hardly without risks. As I wrote to Flamer, it carries political and economic implications. Despite the bravado, Pakistan can't rely on Chinese goodwill alone - Russia's trying that at the moment, since European and US sanctions following its adventurism into Ukraine and Syria. It's not working and China hasn't been able to pick up the slack that Russia lost from Europe.

Nations that have threatened the US with nuclear weapons are stuck in the mid-20th century. Cuba tried it; got embargoed. North Korea tried it; hardly a success story there either. It's not a viable solution.

And it's irrational. Of course Pakistanis are angry the US is requiring Pakistan to pay for its own aircraft without US money, but with Pakistanis suggesting Russian alternatives do we think Russia is going to allow Pakistan FMS money? Nope, they'll want to be paid too.

So how's the US' demand any different from what Russia would do? How would Russian alternatives, notoriously costly to support long-term, be less costly? This is just a case of people throwing a tantrum because their subsidies are being cut. Which you, being a business guy should know rarely goes over well with a population - Egypt and Venezuela can offer examples of unrest following subsidies cuts.

I forgive your compatriots, but also wish they'd take more time to think about these things before writing them. There are consequences that haven't been considered.

Our nukes exist wholly and solely to protect Pakistan and must never...ever...be used. Frankly the only reason I know that we have them is because our adversaries have them.

Same with the US, China and Russia. The others have them and we can't be left without them. France is somewhat of a holdover, and so is the UK. North Korea is pursuing a viable nuclear deterrent because of the three bigs too.

This is why unilateral disarmament is a pipe dream and total disarmament is unreasonable. So long as mistrust reigns in their relationships these types of weapons will persist as part of an enduring stockpile.

Sweden once had a nuclear weapons program. Poor little Norway would have had to get them too keep Sweden honest.

Though that would be through a NATO nuclear weapons sharing agreement instead.

So how was your bakery delivery ?

Very tiring, but rewarding, We cater business lunches - I do bake things other then pastries, but I like them best - dinners and most often breakfasts. Unfortunetly, most of the large businesses aren't HQ'd in Sandefjord, and Oslo is 2 hours away.

If I'm driving, I have to leave really, really early to make it before breakfast starts, as I need time to deliver and help setup for the occurance.

I'm not the only employee I employ though, just the one that works most in the mornings. Being a manager sucks that way... being the owner is even worse.

No reply in the previous post....did I hit a raw nerve ?

Nah, just raw dough. Actually, I got in trouble for being off-topic a few days ago, so I'm being more careful until that blows over. I think the mods like me though. Or at least Waz does.

I told you that your croquembouche looked like the Leaning Tower of Pisa but did you listen ?

I actually had to look croquembouche up. I don't know if I could do it. Looks dangerous.

Danishes are something I do a lot, pies and cakes too. Donuts are another. I can't say anyone's ever ordered a croquembouche before, but maybe I'll look to expand into France?

 

[MastanKhan]

I thought that would be the case pushed into a corner you bite back right?

Dr, Gupta,

We are not biting back---we are just going into a different direction---no disrespect---no insults---no punn---the U S has made its choice---pakistan has to make its choice too---.

Hi,

The reason I have written about the increase of nucs by pakistan by a multitude---is that supposedly---the U S can take 95-98% of them at their current locations either thru their quick deployment forces target at pakistan 24/7 or thru other assets.

But---as the number of our assets increases and there are more locations---the percentage of the american strike success reduces by a multitude as well.

So---if the number increase to 250--300 nuc and if 10% are mated for immediate delivery----the strike force is a failure---.

 

[Spectre]

Same with the US, China and Russia. The others have them and we can't be left without them. France is somewhat of a holdover, and so is the UK. North Korea is perusing a viable nuclear deterrent because of the three bigs too.

This is why unilateral disarmament is a pipe dream and total disarmament is unreasonable. So long as mistrust reigns in their relationships these types of weapons will persist as part of an enduring stockpile.

What are the criteria for any nation allowed to posses Nukes?

When China was "allowed" or atleast legitimised then what stops one for extending similar concessions to India, Vietnam, Philippines among other countries? It is another thing that India got that capability and had to bear the cost of sanctions.

Israel has nukes, US has nukes then why sanction Iran from getting the nukes the same way Pakistan did? Iran was sanctioned to ruins but not Pakistan - it got a breather after a short spell - because it suited American interests during WoT?

The whole thing wreaks of hypocrisy and double standards. There is no moral justification for anyone possessing nukes and then not allowing others to do the same.

Then we talk about proliferation - It is a sensitive topic on PDF but what are the penalties? Let's not beat around the bush - Penalty is not existent. Pakistan with its record of proliferation and state sponsored at that according to many can get whatever it wants from China making the whole NSG thingy a big joke at humanity's expense.

In the end all I would like to say, Nuclear policy of all of EU or US is just an extension of their Diplomatic and Defence Policy - It can be a carrot if you are an ally or a stick if you are not one. Same with Russia or China - they can be your savious from complete isolations if west doesn't play ball.