Retired Army Colonel, Lawrence B. Wilkerson, former chief of staff to United States Tells reasons of US presence in Afghanistan

[Taimoor Khan]

I would respectfully disagree. Obviously, it is a direct concern for the entire world if any nuclear armed country falls into instability and chaos. As long as all members of the nuclear armed club, including Pakistan, live up to the standards required to be at that lofty level, all is well. How the Pakistani people live up to those standards, by whatever means they wish to, is entirely up to them, of course, as you point out. Nobody should interfere with that process at all, I agree. But chaos? No.

How many so called American "seal teams" "moved into" then Soviet Union now Russia to secure its nukes when it was disintegrating?

I don't think you fully understand what it means to be a nuclear state.

 

[VCheng]

How many so called American "seal teams" "moved into" then Soviet Union now Russia to secure its nukes when it was disintegrating?

I don't think you fully understand what it means to be a nuclear state.

Please read up on how the nuclear weapons in all of the ex-USSR republics were secured after the collapse. Nuclear weapons inside Russia remained secured by its own forces. I don't think you and a majority of Pakistanis fully understand what it means to be a nuclear state, and the responsibilities such a status comes with.

 

[Taimoor Khan]

Please read up on how the nuclear weapons in all of the ex-USSR republics were secured after the collapse. Nuclear weapons inside Russia remained secured by its own forces. I don't think you and a majority of Pakistanis fully understand what it means to be a nuclear state, and the responsibilities such a status comes with.

And I can assure you, no seal team or any hostile act against the sovereignty of Soviet Union/Russia was even comprehended , let alone planed, forget about execution.

Here is a good education for you:

What Happened to the Soviet Superpower’s Nuclear Arsenal? Clues for the Nuclear Security Summit | Harvard Kennedy School


Twenty years ago Russia and fourteen other newly-independent states emerged from the ruins of the Soviet empire, many as nations for the first time in history. As is typical in the aftermath of the collapse of an empire, this was followed by a period of chaos, confusion, and corruption. As the saying went at the time, “everything is for sale.” At that same moment, as the Soviet state imploded, 35,000 nuclear weapons remained at thousands of sites across a vast Eurasian landmass that stretched across eleven time zones. Today, fourteen of the fifteen successor states to the Soviet Union are nuclear weapons-free. When the U.S.S.R. disappeared, 3,200 strategic nuclear warheads remained in Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus, most of them atop intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) that stood on alert, ready to be fired at targets in the U.S. Today, every one of the nuclear weapons in Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus has been deactivated and returned to Russia



Again, I would strongly advise, to understand what it means to be a nuclear power.

 

[VCheng]

And I can assure you, no seal team or any hostile act against the sovereignty of Soviet Union/Russia was even comprehended , let alone planed, forget about execution.

Here is a good education for you:

What Happened to the Soviet Superpower’s Nuclear Arsenal? Clues for the Nuclear Security Summit | Harvard Kennedy School


Twenty years ago Russia and fourteen other newly-independent states emerged from the ruins of the Soviet empire, many as nations for the first time in history. As is typical in the aftermath of the collapse of an empire, this was followed by a period of chaos, confusion, and corruption. As the saying went at the time, “everything is for sale.” At that same moment, as the Soviet state imploded, 35,000 nuclear weapons remained at thousands of sites across a vast Eurasian landmass that stretched across eleven time zones. Today, fourteen of the fifteen successor states to the Soviet Union are nuclear weapons-free. When the U.S.S.R. disappeared, 3,200 strategic nuclear warheads remained in Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus, most of them atop intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) that stood on alert, ready to be fired at targets in the U.S. Today, every one of the nuclear weapons in Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus has been deactivated and returned to Russia



Again, I would strongly advise, to understand what it means to be a nuclear power.

Right. Do you know HOW those weapons were all returned to Russia safely, and under what safeguards? Again, I would suggest you to understand what it means to be a responsible nuclear power. Collapse makes the rest of the world involved, whether you like it or not.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Why it has to be always the “Lawrences” for all the major Satanic ops in the Muslim lands?!? Is Lawrence the other name of Iblis the Satan?!?!

 

[Taimoor Khan]

Right. Do you know HOW those weapons were all returned to Russia safely, and under what safeguards? Again, I would suggest you to understand what it means to be a responsible nuclear power. Collapse makes the rest of the world involved, whether you like it or not.

As I said, "collapse, Chaos, confusion" , all these things have already happened in USSR, inluding what we now know as Russian Federation. Not a single hostile act was exhibited by the armed forces of united states and its allies to "scoop up" or "secure" the nuclear weapons of Soviet Union.

I am not talking in French with you here, but any act by a nation, involving its military against another sovereign nation, under any circumstances is classed as "act of war". You should be thanking your lucky stars that no such stupidity was planned by then American establishment against USSR, otherwise the land you love so much would have been turned into nuclear wasteland.

All such thoughts, rather hallucinations should be/must be cured within American establishment and its citizens that they can simply turn up into nuclear armed states and scoop up their arsenal. They are extremely dangerous, reckless and beyond being stupid, putting humanity at great risk of extinction.

 

[VCheng]

As I said, "collapse, Chaos, confusion" , all these things have already happened in USSR, inluding what we now know as Russian Federation. Not a single hostile act was exhibited by the armed forces of united states and its allies to "scoop up" or "secure" the nuclear weapons of Soviet Union.

I am not talking in French with you here, but any act by a nation, involving its military against another sovereign nation, under any circumstances is classed as "act of war". You should be thanking your lucky stars that no such stupidity was planned by then American establishment against USSR, otherwise the land you love so much would have been turned into nuclear wasteland.

All such thoughts, rather hallucinations should be/must be cured within American establishment and its citizens that they can simply turn up into nuclear armed states and scoop up their arsenal. They are extremely dangerous, reckless and beyond being stupid, putting humanity at great risk of extinction.

The USA funneled over half a billion dollars and many personnel immediately to work alongside the Russians to secure those weapons, because the Russians had no money and not enough personnel to do the job. No overt hostile acts were needed since the Russian and Americans had already agreed upon a single nuclear successor as the collapse became inevitable, but all options remained on the table, including military teams. That is plain English, not Swahili, either.

I could go on to more details, but I'd rather not. The world should thank its lucky stars, including you, that USA did all of that for world peace. (The total costs exceeded 20 billion dollars, eventually, sourced with contributions from many allies, but USA paid the bulk of that.)

(BTW, if you have some free time, read up on the Global Alliance against Nuclear Terrorism.)

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Now a gawd damed retired US Army colonel has been elevated into the stratoshphere. These colonels come cheap by the dozen in USA. There must be 1,000s of them retired in USA. Who gives a flying frigg about what he says. As regards nukes what does he propose? Walk in and walk out with them. The US can't even tame bunch a chappel wearing part time fighters but they gonna be able to pull this off in Pakistan? Get on yer bike!

And if I were the good colonel I would be more worried that some crazed QNon inside the US military does not grab a nuke or two from US inventory and use it to clean out some Blach ghetto.

A good example is this retired US airforce colonel involved in the Congress insurrection terror attack.

 

[Taimoor Khan]

The USA funneled over half a billion dollars and many personnel immediately to work alongside the Russians to secure those weapons, because the Russians had no money and not enough personnel to do the job. No overt hostile acts were needed since the Russian and Americans had already agreed upon a single nuclear successor as the collapse became inevitable, but all options remained on the table, including military teams. That is plain English, not Swahili, either.

I could go on to more details, but I'd rather not. The world should thank its lucky stars, including you, that USA did all of that for world peace. (The eventual total costs exceeded 20 billion dollars, eventually, sourced with contributions from many allies, but USA paid the bulk of that.)

(BTW, if you have some free time, read up on the Global Alliance against Nuclear Terrorism.)

You are not getting it do you? Which part of "no military action" you did not understand? In case of USSR, all was done with the full consent and approval of Russian/Soviet authorities, and returned to Russia. I can assure you any silly attempt by America involving its military would have met a very sorry ending for the world as we know today.


In this particular case, the thread we are discussing, this hallucinating yank is talking about scooping Pakistan nuclear stockpile by US military based in Afghanistan as if they are visiting their "khala ga ghar". I cant say about any other nations, but in case of Pakistan, nukes are considered as crown jewels in the array of weapons the state posses. So even if we envisage the situation of chaos within the Islamic republic of Pakistan, any attempt by any foreign military to do any such silly thing, will be classed as "last resort option" (i.e once all else is failing). You are intelligent enough to imagine the aftermath.

I did not use the word reckless and stupid loosely.

 

[VCheng]

You are not getting it do you? Which part of "no military action" you did not understand? In case of USSR, all was done with the full consent and approval of Russian/Soviet authorities, and returned to Russia. I can assure you any silly attempt by America involving its military would have met a very sorry ending for the world as we know today.

What part of "collapse of a nuclear state makes it a global problem" is so hard to you to comprehend? Russia agreed to do what what was needed, so nothing overt war was necessary. The next nuclear state to collapse may or may not agree. The world has to be ready, regardless. (And it is.)

In this particular case, the thread we are discussing, this hallucinating yank is talking about scooping Pakistan nuclear stockpile by US military based in Afghanistan as if they are visiting their "khala ga ghar". I cant say about any other nations, but in case of Pakistan, nukes are considered as crown jewels in the array of weapons the state posses. So even if we envisage the situation of chaos within the Islamic republic of Pakistan, any attempt by any foreign military to do any such silly thing, will be classed as "last resort option" (i.e once all else is failing). You are intelligent enough to imagine the aftermath.

His words only apply in the case of instability, which he stated. No problem here.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

I would respectfully disagree. Obviously, it is a direct concern for the entire world if any nuclear armed country falls into instability and chaos. As long as all members of the nuclear armed club, including Pakistan, live up to the standards required to be at that lofty level, all is well. How the Pakistani people live up to those standards, by whatever means they wish to, is entirely up to them, of course, as you point out. Nobody should interfere with that process at all, I agree. But chaos? No.

Firstly, we will stabilise Hindustani nuclear stockpiles from the control of a cabal of Hindu extremists and Hindu terror sympathisers who have worked actively to threaten and harm the interests and lives of Pakistani citizens, Muslims within the subcontinent, Kashmiri citizens and to destabilise south Asia in general.

"direct concern for the entire world"...yah, that was a good one mate, like you speak for the entire world.

Do you think everyone agrees with your world view just like, because you think you talk with enough crafted verbiage to conceal your inherent bias?

The man ultimately in charge of Indian nuclear launch was not long ago on a sanction list for possible genocide, placed on that list by American and European government agencies. Pakistan's PM has never been under such scrutiny.

Objectively speaking, once you get your head out from the deep recesses of your Pakistan-phobic back passage, there is far greater justification to secure Indian stockpiles than Pakistani ones.

 

[VCheng]

Firstly, we will stabilise Hindustani nuclear stockpiles from the control of a cabal of Hindu extremists and Hindu terror sympathisers who have worked actively to threaten and harm the interests and lives of Pakistani citizens, Muslims within the subcontinent, Kashmiri citizens and to destabilise south Asia in general.

"direct concern for the entire world"...yah, that was a good one mate, like you speak for the entire world.

Do you think everyone agrees with your world view just like, because you think you talk with enough crafted verbiage to conceal your inherent bias?

The man ultimately in charge of Indian nuclear launch was not long ago on a sanction list for possible genocide, placed on that list by American and European government agencies. Pakistan's PM has never been under such scrutiny.

Objectively speaking, once you get your head out from the deep recesses of your Pakistan-phobic back passage, there is far greater justification to secure Indian stockpiles than Pakistani ones.

I can assure you that everything I have said above applies equally to India if it were to collapse. And that the world response will be a joint effort by all the major powers involved, including everyone's back passages who place the rest of the world at risk. No doubt about that, like it or not.

 

[Taimoor Khan]

What part of "collapse of a nuclear state makes it a global problem" is so hard to you to comprehend? Russia agreed to do what what was needed, so nothing overt war was necessary. The next nuclear state to collapse may or may not agree. The world has to be ready, regardless. (And it is.)

Global problem maybe, but again it depends on who is making the most noises. Rest might not even care. More importantly, the citizens of the state in chaos might not even agree to let go their nukes as a matter of pride. Russia didnt give a single nuke within its own territory in mainland while food disappeared from its markets, while the ex soviets states returned its nuke, every single one of them.

I am going to make it very clear to you in plain English. There is NO option, of any so called special forces of any nation, barging into sovereign nuclear state and grabbing its nuclear arsenal, without facing the very real and nightmare scenario of nuclear exchange between the two nations which might very easily blow over to full on Armageddon scenario.

Cease and desist, is the order of the day.

His words only apply in the case of instability, which he stated. No problem here.

Instabilty, choas or whatever, any military option exercised is an act of war and will be meet with similar response. No rocket science here.

 

[VCheng]

Global problem maybe, but again it depends on who is making the most noises. Rest might not even care. More importantly, the citizens of the state in chaos might not even agree to let go their nukes as a matter of pride. Russia didnt give a single nuke within its own territory in mainland while food disappeared from its markets, while the ex soviets states returned its nuke, every single one of them.

I am going to make it very clear to you in plain English. There is NO option, of any so called special forces of any nation, barging into sovereign nuclear state and grabbing its nuclear arsenal, without facing the very real and nightmare scenario of nuclear exchange between the two nations which might very easily blow over to full on Armageddon scenario.

Cease and desist, is the order of the day.




Instabilty, choas or whatever, any military option exercised is an act of war and will be meet with similar response. No rocket science here.

Has it occurred to you to understand what the ramifications of the "collapse" in the context of this discussion? There may be no longer an effective command and control system capable of functioning in such an unlikely eventuality. All your feel-good chest-thumping aside, nobody can be accused of barging into a sovereign state that no longer exists in any effective manner. If said sovereign states exists and has effective control of its nuclear arsenal, then there is no problem that needs a solution.

It may also help you to bear in mind that USA has actually helped Pakistan improve its controls, exactly so that any concerns are allayed.

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

As long as Pakistan remains stable, it is all good, and there is obviously no need for any such actions.

The USA funneled over half a billion dollars and many personnel immediately to work alongside the Russians to secure those weapons, because the Russians had no money and not enough personnel to do the job. No overt hostile acts were needed since the Russian and Americans had already agreed upon a single nuclear successor as the collapse became inevitable, but all options remained on the table, including military teams. That is plain English, not Swahili, either.

I could go on to more details, but I'd rather not. The world should thank its lucky stars, including you, that USA did all of that for world peace. (The total costs exceeded 20 billion dollars, eventually, sourced with contributions from many allies, but USA paid the bulk of that.)

(BTW, if you have some free time, read up on the Global Alliance against Nuclear Terrorism.)

India has much severe internal turmoils(separatists, terorists,naxalites, hindu extremists, weak center) yet never saw US utter a word on safeguarding indian nukes let alone their poor record and history of nuclear accidents. They have to their resume the biggest industrial disaster of history , tens of thousands people dead because of a gas leak.
Secondly language matters. You never see them say they will together with pak army secure if needed. It looks more like giving india assurance to attack while they take care of the nukes.