REPORT: Pakistani nukes already under US control

[superbikez]

I think mods can see who is posting garbage stuff here..

kick off from here...

 

[General Fujita]

DONT BE SMART OTHERWISE ILL KICK UR ***!... You have already move this topic different way its good for you kindly stick to the topic otherwise dont post (garbge stuff here) thanks.

Nothing good ever came out of you. Internet thug....

lol hahah

 

[superbikez]

Nothing good ever came out of you. Internet thug....

lol hahah

whats so LOL ? just like you post lots of proper and good stuff over here ? lol just check forum and post "HOHA HE HE" and signoff!

 

[General Fujita]

Whatever i may post, atleast i dont refer to the same mirages and f-7's that protected pakistan for the last 3 decades as "paper planes." Not to forget to mention the jf-17, the same "paper plane" thats been a major success with over 800 units being ordered by 8 different nations. And thats just the beginning. Boy, it really must be some paper plane.

so cuss on you

 

[superbikez]

over 800 units being ordered by 8 different nations.

becuz they are Cheap in cost point! All those nations ordered 800 units fford F18 super Hornets? su 30? F16 block 50/52? etc

 

[General Fujita]

Exactly, the fact it is cheap and let me add CAPABLE aswell is the prime formula for its success. Dosent really make it a paper plane does it?

 

[Vinod2070]

Why don't you guys take the PM route?

It is becoming a nuisance, these personal attacks.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Possible. USA was a paranoid country after 9/11. There are theories of why there has not been an attack on the USA soil after that date that say that AQ was threatened with obliteration of their most holy places if that happens! The Iraq war was to convey the seriousness of that message as per these theories.

I am not too inclined to believe such theories. They could be true or not.

Same for the Pakistan nuke theory. Not entirely impossible given the state of the USA paranoia after 9/11. May be false. Stratfor is a respected intelligence organization and their word does carry a weight.

Sure, but there are other respected think tanks that argue the opposite. Secondly, Stratfor has in the past also made some inflammatory analysis regarding the involvement of senior Pakistani officials with the Taliban, so they cam be alarmist.

The report also mentions how Musharraf, Benazir and Zardari have used 'nuclear blackmail', or argued of the potential risks associated with Pakistan failing, to get US and global support. If Pakistani nukes were actually in control of the US, there would be no such appeals from the Pakistani leadership for help. The global community, and the US specifically, would say 'F Off - if you start to fail we are gonna take the nukes out'.

Yet the international concern over Pakistan and the attempts to help her continue, and often the reason mentioned behind those continued attempts to help Pakistan stabilize is the fact that the world cannot see a nuclear Pakistan fall apart.

Also, on the question of the hundred million the US provided Pakistan, read through the elaborate safeguards Pakistan has set up. Pakistan developed its own permissive action locks (PAL's) because the US wasn't willing to share technology on those for fear others would find out how their own weapons were secured, and Pakistan did not want to install US PAL's for fear that they could be disabled by the US.

Pakistan's safeguards are really too elaborate a setup for nukes that are already 'under US control'.

Final question, how exactly does the US control these nukes anyway? Even if they know where every nuke is (a very big if), how do you think they will actually secure them, given the 10,000 strong security force, AA defenses on the installations, possible underground bunkers?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Link to thread detailing Pakistani nuclear controls:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-mi...ets-interview-director-spd-pakistani-nca.html

 

[Vinod2070]

Sure, but there are other respected think tanks that argue the opposite. Secondly, Stratfor has in the past also made some inflammatory analysis regarding the involvement of senior Pakistani officials with the Taliban, so they cam be alarmist.

The report also mentions how Musharraf, Benazir and Zardari have used 'nuclear blackmail', or argued of the potential risks associated with Pakistan failing, to get US and global support. If Pakistani nukes were actually in control of the US, there would be no such appeals from the Pakistani leadership for help. The global community, and the US specifically, would say 'F Off - if you start to fail we are gonna take the nukes out'.

Yet the international concern over Pakistan and the attempts to help her continue, and often the reason mentioned behind those continued attempts to help Pakistan stabilize is the fact that the world cannot see a nuclear Pakistan fall apart.

Also, on the question of the hundred million the US provided Pakistan, read through the elaborate safeguards Pakistan has set up. Pakistan developed its own permissive action locks (PAL's) because the US wasn't willing to share technology on those for fear others would find out how their own weapons were secured, and Pakistan did not want to install US PAL's for fear that they could be disabled by the US.

Pakistan's safeguards are really too elaborate a setup for nukes that are already 'under US control'.

Final question, how exactly does the US control these nukes anyway? Even if they know where every nuke is (a very big if), how do you think they will actually secure them, given the 10,000 strong security force, AA defenses on the installations, possible underground bunkers?

See, technically it is possible for the USA to control them by electronic means and by keeping them in surveillance so they can't be moved or used without them knowing it and approving it. All the more possible as the weapons will need to be moved for mating and can be tracked while doing that.

Whether that is the case is open to question. Possibly yes, probably no.

 

[superbikez]

thanks AgNoStIc MuSliM

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

See, technically it is possible for the USA to control them by electronic means and by keeping them in surveillance so they can't be moved or used without them knowing it and approving it. All the more possible as the weapons will need to be moved for mating and can be tracked while doing that.

Whether that is the case is open to question. Possibly yes, probably no.

The possibility of the US controlling and disabling the nukes through electronic means was a concern that was foremost when Pakistan rejected US designed PAL's - we designed them ourselves for that reason.

The weapons can possibly be tracked while mating the warheads to the missiles, but there are still a huge amount of unknowns. The US still needs to know where all of Pakistan's estimated hundred plus warheads are, and it needs to keep every single site under constant surveillance. While US satellites help, I don't see how they could monitor every single site round the clock unless they had a dedicated sat. for every single site.

Given that the electronic controls on the Nukes are Pakistani, disabling them electronically is not an option, so that only leaves out physical intervention to attempt 'nuke control'. Rambo style op's are quite obviously wishful thinking, so that leaves air/missile strikes.

Any air/missile strike would have to strike the targets almost simultaneously, and get through Pakistan's air defenses undetected, because as soon as we got a whiff of what was going on, most likely things are going Kaboom.

In short, unless the US can control the nukes electronically, the risks of 'securing' Pakistani nukes are too high.

 

[Vinod2070]

Agree. It is possible only if there is Pakistani co-operation in doing that.

Unless that was secured at some point under duress with the understanding to keep it under wraps, it is very difficult to do that. Even the co-operation secured for the war on Taliban was secured under duress.

So it is a hypothetical scenario for those not in the know. Strange to think, yes, but stranger things have happened in the world and are even now happening.

 

[genmirajborgza786]

I am being realistic.Can you please explain how can we beat America in war?This is modern warfare and you should forget about our leader stealing nuclear weapons .Army will launch coup immediately if civilian leaders try to harm Nukes..

First of all Pakistan cannot beat U.S.A in a war bottom line but it for sure cant just lose it in one phone call too. Now let me give you a real pice of realistic reason. North Korea with two to three 1970/80 model atomic bombs have given a tight slap in the face of the U.S.A by threatening Japan & South korea if it is bombed and is yet it bombed forget about being bombed NATO has not dared to kill even a masqito in North Korea THATS WAT YOU CALL LEADERSHIP IS ALL ABOUT ! Pakistan with much modern 25 to 50 maybe 60 nuclear weopons can easily threaten alot of oil fields in the gulf states if Pakistan was or is to be bombed by U.S.A/NATO etc so say when U.S.A threatend Pakistan of bombing it & sending it back to the stone age Pakistan shoud have replied back that fine sir' before going back to the stone age Pakistan can easily send the oil fields in the gulf states to HELL & then can atleast dignifiedly go back to the stone age /early man stage or be it mel gibson's Apocalypto fair enough ! Leadership is Mehmood Ahmedinejad, leadership is Putin, leadership is Kim Jong-il, leadership is Hu Jintao, leadership is Mahatir Mohemmed, leadership is Indira Gandhi, leadership is Zia ur Rahman leadership, is Zia ul Haq, leadership is Mao Tse-tung. Leadership is NOT musharraf, benazir,nawas or zardari .
thank you
Pakistan Zindabad

 

[hasang20]

First of all Pakistan cannot beat U.S.A in a war bottom line but it for sure cant just lose it in one phone call too. Now let me give you a real pice of realistic reason. North Korea with two to three 1970/80 model atomic bombs have given a tight slap in the face of the U.S.A by threatening Japan & South korea if it is bombed and is yet it bombed forget about being bombed NATO has not dared to kill even a masqito in North Korea THATS WAT YOU CALL LEADERSHIP IS ALL ABOUT ! Pakistan with much modern 25 to 50 maybe 60 nuclear weopons can easily threaten alot of oil fields in the gulf states if Pakistan was or is to be bombed by U.S.A/NATO etc so say when U.S.A threatend Pakistan of bombing it & sending it back to the stone age Pakistan shoud have replied back that fine sir' before going back to the stone age Pakistan can easily send the oil fields in the gulf states to HELL & then can atleast dignifiedly go back to the stone age /early man stage or be it mel gibson's Apocalypto fair enough ! Leadership is Mehmood Ahmedinejad, leadership is Putin, leadership is Kim Jong-il, leadership is Hu Jintao, leadership is Mahatir Mohemmed, leadership is Indira Gandhi, leadership is Zia ur Rahman leadership, is Zia ul Haq, leadership is Mao Tse-tung. Leadership is NOT musharraf, benazir,nawas or zardari .
thank you
Pakistan Zindabad

our missiles are well capable of targeting US cities.......why would we kill muslims in Iraq?