Should pakistan use Chemical weapons to defeat the taleban?

[frashid30@hotmail.com]

As most pakistanis now know the taliban are using very good tactics to evade the pak army. Especially aerial bombing. They tend to hide in deep bunkers and tunnels and then emerge back out to create more chaos. Use of chemical weapons would be a great way to defeat them in their evasion tactics. Civillian deaths can be avoided by clearing the territories area by area, arresting all the young men claiming to be civillians etc untill they are cleared of any links with the taleban. Hard times require hard tactics. If this is done quickly it will not give the taliban any time to adapt by getting hold of gas masks etc.

 

[Awesome]

May be stronger force could be used, like sending hundreds of thousands of people in there and kicking out everyone who seems like they shouldn't be there back to Afghanistan.

But WMDs would kill many of our own people too. Many innocents. So tough, but smart is needed at the same time.

 

[Lockheed F-16]

The problem is that they are on our soil and we cannot use such ways. But they really deserve to be nuked.

 

[syed999]

no we should not, taliban fighters think they are doing the right think, we need to close right wing mullah schools and expel foriegn fighters and indian agents

 

[Kharian_Beast]

Firstly, how do you propose using chemical weapons on an enemy that you have negotiated a ceasefire and fragile peace framework with?

Secondly, chemical weapons never solved anything.

 

[sohailbutt]

As most pakistanis now know the taliban are using very good tactics to evade the pak army. Especially aerial bombing. They tend to hide in deep bunkers and tunnels and then emerge back out to create more chaos. Use of chemical weapons would be a great way to defeat them in their evasion tactics. Civillian deaths can be avoided by clearing the territories area by area, arresting all the young men claiming to be civillians etc untill they are cleared of any links with the taleban. Hard times require hard tactics. If this is done quickly it will not give the taliban any time to adapt by getting hold of gas masks etc.

hey man u crazy or wut, u r saying Pakistan takes an axe n hits right in it's foot, do you know what chemical weapons will do to the people and to the inhabitants of other adjoining areas to where they will b used.

also, where do you think all the left out gas would go which the taliban donot inhale

Use of chemical weapons against our own people in our own areas will make us another Saddam Hussain, i think no one wants that to happen

 

[Machoman]

We should kick all the Taliban out of the country! they are disease to a world.

 

[Patriot]

hey man u crazy or wut, u r saying Pakistan takes an axe n hits right in it's foot, do you know what chemical weapons will do to the people and to the inhabitants of other adjoining areas to where they will b used.

also, where do you think all the left out gas would go which the taliban donot inhale

Use of chemical weapons against our own people in our own areas will make us another Saddam Hussain, i think no one wants that to happen

Agreed.If anything, we will fuel Taliban insurgency by doing this.

 

[Muradk]

As most pakistanis now know the taliban are using very good tactics to evade the pak army. Especially aerial bombing. They tend to hide in deep bunkers and tunnels and then emerge back out to create more chaos. Use of chemical weapons would be a great way to defeat them in their evasion tactics. Civillian deaths can be avoided by clearing the territories area by area, arresting all the young men claiming to be civillians etc untill they are cleared of any links with the taleban. Hard times require hard tactics. If this is done quickly it will not give the taliban any time to adapt by getting hold of gas masks etc.

So you think or do you know that Pakistan has Chemical weapons please use your brains this forum is now on an international forum for getting news about Pakistan don't make statements which are incorrect that might get us into more trouble few feeble words of a young one can put a nation on fire. Just to give an example Pakistan lost a billion $$ deal of something because a young boy of a general talked about it on a forum and Army lost the deal.

Now to answer your question If Army wants they can walk over the Talibans and mullah controlled areas but they don't want too it will bring only blood shed and a bad one. Army will wait till all others fail than they will take over not before that. Army works in 2 parts First Negotiation a dialogue to resolve the Issue Second Disarm If the First fails a warning is given with a time limit if that doesn't work than Slaughter.

 

[Xeric]

Pakistan has chemical weapons..wow i never knew that

What the hell!

i suppose you were not high when you posted this thread.

Why not to use biological weapons, instead.
You idiot!

 

[Omar1984]

Chemical weapons? Isn't that what Saddam used against his own people? Do you suggest we do the same with our people? That's a crazy suggestion.

Just like every nation, Pakistan will throw the criminals in prison. Dont give the US a reason to invade Pakistan? Remember the entire Weapons of Mass Destruction Drama? If we use chemical weapons then the innocent people around the area will be affected, then more people will turn against the government and will give the US an excuse to invade Pakistan.

Instead, Pakistan should not fight in those areas, the innocent civilians killed in croosfire will create more "TTP Taliban" and more anti-government forces.

 

[S-2]

Yes. I think that there's an application here that makes sense-

1.) What does your threat assessment tell you about the enemy's capabilities? Do they carry masks? Do they, if so, have spare filters?

2.) Do you face extensive networks of connected tunnels with rooms, storage areas, etc or are they very small, unsophisticated, and discrete from one another?

3.) Have your opponents shown a propensity or ability to reoccupy these positions after they've been cleared?

If they don't have masks, filters, nor de-con ability; if they exhibit some sophistication in their tunnel networks and; if they show a propensity or desire to reoccupy these positions after they've been cleared then I'd STRONGLY consider the use of a persistant non-lethal riot control agent like tear gas or any of the variants.

While not perfect and old tunnels would need a spot-check on the off chance that the enemy has acquired masks, filters, or (most important) a means to de-con, I'd check a few after the fact by about a week. Don't do so without being prepared for a fight. If you turn up empty and continue not to see masks among the opponent, there may be validity as an area denial weapon.

Needless to say, you'd know when you hit a tunnel that had been checked by your troops. So too civilians.

I'd personally use persistant nerve agent but you never know when some kid goes down a perfectly empty but lethal tunnel. Dead in minutes and not worth it. Most children would never get very far into a tear gas tunnel without getting the hell right back out.

Yeah. Under the right circumstance I could see it.

 

[third eye]

Yes , Pak should use chem weapons on the Talibs if it wants to worsen an already terrible situation and make itself a pariah state.

After all this is what saddam did to his people and paid the price.

 

[frashid30@hotmail.com]

Yes. I think that there's an application here that makes sense-

1.) What does your threat assessment tell you about the enemy's capabilities? Do they carry masks? Do they, if so, have spare filters?

2.) Do you face extensive networks of connected tunnels with rooms, storage areas, etc or are they very small, unsophisticated, and discrete from one another?

3.) Have your opponents shown a propensity or ability to reoccupy these positions after they've been cleared?

If they don't have masks, filters, nor de-con ability; if they exhibit some sophistication in their tunnel networks and; if they show a propensity or desire to reoccupy these positions after they've been cleared then I'd STRONGLY consider the use of a persistant non-lethal riot control agent like tear gas or any of the variants.

While not perfect and old tunnels would need a spot-check on the off chance that the enemy has acquired masks, filters, or (most important) a means to de-con, I'd check a few after the fact by about a week. Don't do so without being prepared for a fight. If you turn up empty and continue not to see masks among the opponent, there may be validity as an area denial weapon.

Needless to say, you'd know when you hit a tunnel that had been checked by your troops. So too civilians.

I'd personally use persistant nerve agent but you never know when some kid goes down a perfectly empty but lethal tunnel. Dead in minutes and not worth it. Most children would never get very far into a tear gas tunnel without getting the hell right back out.

Yeah. Under the right circumstance I could see it.

Thankyou, for this intelligent and non biased response. I would agree with you that nerve agents may be abit too extreme but lingering riot control gas is a really good option. The only problem will be that it is not lethal, and it will allow the taleban to escape, however carefull shelling and strategic use of the gas could force the taleban into traps where they can be cannon fodder and target practice of the cobra's.

With reguards to nerve agents etc, as far as i know pakistan does not have any chemical weapons nor has it ever expressed interest in developing them. If im correct (please correct me if im wrong). Pakistan is a signatory tot the chemicals/biological weapons treaty, which was signed in the 70's.

 

[S-2]

I've no interest in firing, spraying, salting any areas with CS or any other riot control agent. My sole purpose would be the use of a non-lethal agent to deny the re-occupation of fighting positions, tunnel networks and/or bunkers that couldn't be destroyed for one reason or another before moving on.

I've no interest in spreading this through a forest, over farm-land or any other feature as a denial or no-go zone as part of a cordon and sweep.

And finally only if the tactical intelligence suggests that there exist all the outlined caveats.

Hope that helps.

Thanks.