Why Can't Pakistan Shoot Down U.S. Drones?

[kaal2009]

Only the quote about the United States having taken control of most of Pakistan's nuclear warheads after 9/11 was taken from the external source (to make that clearer, I have now marked the start and end of the quote); the comments about i) India and Pakistan acting together to eject the United States from Afghanistan and ii) the survival advantage of countries like India and Pakistan over countries like the United States in case of nuclear war are my own. These two points remain valid whether or not the report of American control over Pakistan's nuclear weapons is true. That report was quoted only as a possible explanation of why Pakistan is not shooting down American drones and because it tallied with what the C.I.A. specialist, quoted in post # 11 on page 1 above, had said BEFORE the attacks by the drones started. But whether or not that report is true, the following points I made remain valid:-
i) The American drone attacks are attacks on the subcontinent as a whole, not just on Pakistan;
ii)Stopping the drone attacks is part of the larger problem of ejecting the United States from Afghanistan;
iii)Since the drone attacks are the start of an American campaign to occupy and colonise the subcontinent as a whole, not just Pakistan, India and Pakistan should act together to eject the United States from Afghanistan;
iv) The United States will not risk losing its largest cities to Indian nuclear bombs for the sake of remaining in Afghanistan;
v) In operations with conventional weapons in Afghanistan, India and Pakistan will have an overwhelming advantage over the United States and its NATO allies;
vi) In case of a full scale nuclear war between India and the United States, India will survive, the United States will not.

 

[kaal2009]

There is an easy way countries like Pakistan and India can keep their nuclear strength credible: keep testing and expanding their nuclear arsenals. There is absolutely no reason why these countries should limit themselves to half a dozen tests while a country like the United States has conducted well over a thousand -- except the habit of behaving like obedient dogs to the White Master. If Pakistan would like to show the world -- and it should -- that it still has control of its nuclear arsenal and it is in good working order, it should conduct a couple of nuclear tests now. Both India and Pakistan should continue improving and expanding their nuclear arsenals and testing the new designs periodically. The firangi is the enemy which has to be destroyed; there is no need to keep yourself weak because the firangi enemy tells you to.

When I say Pakistan should conduct a couple of nuclear tests now, that does not mean that India will mount a conventional attack on it if it does not. There is no question of India attacking Pakistan. Pakistan needs to show independence from the United States and conducting a couple of nuclear tests in, say, a month from now will be a good way to do it. If it is true that the United States has taken control of its centrifuges, etc., it should start working on building new ones.

Beyond that, of course, is the joint responsibility of India and Pakistan to eject the United States from Afghanistan and that is what they should focus on and that also requires further nuclear tests.

 

[kaal2009]

As for India, the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) should determine as quickly as possible an island where thermonuclear weapons can be tested to their full yields and start designing, building and testing thermonuclear weapons, since the head of the Department of Atomic Energy has been bought by the Americans. DRDO should set up whatever facilities are needed to design and produce nuclear weapons independently of the Department of Atomic Energy. The first test should be conducted as quickly as possible, taking a nuclear weapon, of whatever type, from the existing stockpile if necessary, in a matter of weeks and no more than a couple of months. An objective of this test will be to blow the traitor deal, known as the nuclear deal, to bits in defence of India. This test can be conducted on an island, in Pokhran or in New Delhi itself, depending on the type and yield of the nuclear weapon. The best test would be a nuclear weapon mounted on top of a missile in flight and exploded over the island as it would be in use in war, but an underground test will also be fine. Conducting such an above ground test will itself constitute renouncing the Partial Test Ban Treaty; there is no need to make any reference to the traitors of the Ministry of External Affairs who will be blown to bits anyway, along with many other traitors, if the test is conducted in New Delhi itself.

If the media continue the cover up of the news and views of the greatest living Indian, it will be necessary to conduct the first test in New Delhi itself.

 

[batmannow]

shooting down the US drones is not the problem pakistan can do it anytime but does the pakistani establishment have it in them to face the aftereffects. i donot think so.
but i must say they must try to mock shoot a US drone and see what the effect is and then take it from there.this would provide a clear and strong signal to the US I guess

moscow; sir
comming soon!

 

[kaal2009]

I have said that stopping U.S. drone attacks on Pakistan is part of the larger problem of ejecting the United States from Afghanistan. But ejecting the United States from Afghanistan is itself a part of the larger problem of breaking United States' global dominance. Breaking the United States' global dominance, in this nuclear age, requires destroying the United States. The Soviet Union was at least a match for the United States in both its nuclear and conventional military strength but, despite Khrushchev's banging of his shoe in the United Nations, it was not prepared to destroy the United States; all its nuclear buildup was in reaction to the United States' buildup. For the United States, on the other hand, its demonstrated willingness to use its nuclear arms, not for defensive but aggressive purposes, is central to its global dominance. This has consequences for what needs to be done to save the subcontinent from the United States; as I have said, the drone attacks are the opening of a campaign by the United States to directly occupy and colonise the subcontinent.

In designing nuclear weapons for use against the United States, radioactive materials should be identified that can be dispersed over the territory of the United States, either via separate radiological weapons (“dirty bombs&#8221 or as part of the regular thermonuclear weapons, that will so contaminate the territory of the United States with radioactivity that nothing will grow there for at least several years that can be consumed without getting a lethal dose of radiation. This will force the Americans who survive the nuclear bomb explosions on the four thousand largest population centers to eat one another till no one remains alive.

The ‘salting’ of the territory of the United States with such radioactivity can be done in a separate operation -- such as by unmanned aerial vehicles -- after its four thousand largest population centers have been destroyed by regular thermonuclear weapons. This requires that India be the dominant power after the initial exchange of, say, five thousand nuclear weapons between India and the United States. India has the leadership required for this but the cover up of the news and views of the leadership has to be lifted. Lifting this cover up is the first stage of India’s war for survival. As this cover up is lifted, many politicians, media people and, above all, RAW bosses such as the kingpin of C.I.A.-RAW operations in India for decades, K. Subrahmanyam, will try to flee to the United States and those who succeed will share the fate of Americans. Once the cover up of the news about the greatest living Indian is lifted, the genocidal intent and behaviour of the United States toward India will be clear. He has been writing about it for three decades.

The grip of the United States on India through C.I.A.-RAW can be broken only temporarily by the nuclear destruction of New Delhi. Exterminating the population of the United States is essential for India to survive.

 

[kaal2009]

In letters to the press several years ago, I showed how radiological weapons (weapons that spread radioactive material over large areas, instead of producing heat and blast) can give even the smallest country military power comparable to that of a superpower. Just half a dozen two-inch mortars, operated by the country's special forces, can cover a city the size of London with radioactive material in a matter of minutes forcing the city's evacuation. Pakistan could give an ultimatum demanding the immediate stoppage of the Predator attacks on its territory and withdrawal of all NATO forces from Afghanistan in, say, three weeks under pain of such forced evacuation of London. To be effective, the operation should be carried out over London before the ultimatum and the ultimatum should demand withdrawal from Afghanistan on pain of similar forced evacuations of other Western cities of comparable size.
After World War II, the United States had considered having its nuclear arsenal consist almost entirely of radiological weapons. It decided in favour of fission and fusion bombs but that does not mean that countries that cannot easily produce fission and fusion bombs should not go for radiological weapons. They are much more usable and more effective in many ways.

 

[Niazi9]

Reapers are expensive puppies. We knock couple of them down or have our proxies do so and the US will perk up. Problem is that we've already gamed the scenario and realized it would be net loss for us given that the targets are against us as well.

It boils my blood hearing any talk about them being our friends. Just tell that to hundreds of our brave soldiers who have died at the hands of these tribal asswipes. At the end of the day, these people are against the Pakistani nation state and I and one imagines our forces aren't losing sleep over their losses.

 

[kaal2009]

As I have said at the very start of this thread, the drone attacks are the beginning of a campaign to occupy and dismember Pakistan and then the rest of the subcontinent. The United States creates whatever excuses it finds handy for such purposes. What is at stake is the very survival, not just of Pakistan but of the other countries of the subcontinent as well.

 

[kaal2009]

Both India's and Pakistan's armies are parts of the British Indian army. All units, regiments, etc. of India's army have retained the identities they had during British colonial rule and regularly celebrate the anniversaries of their founding by the British, some of them more than 250 years ago. I believe the same is the case with Pakistan's army. MILLIONS of Indians, both Hindu and Muslim, fought under the British in both World War I and World War II and not a single one of them fought the British on behalf of their mother land, except for the prisoners of war taken by the Japanese from the Indian army which were formed into the Azad Hind Fauj by Subhash Chandra Bose. This history of loyalty to whites -- the only change is that the Americans have replaced the British -- has some thing to do with the fact that Pakistan's armed forces do not even try to shoot down American drones. Close relatives -- sons, etc. -- of practically all senior officers of both India's and Pakistan's armed forces live and work in the United States and I have found, in the case of Indians, that their loyalties are with the White Master; I believe the same is the case with officers of Pakistan's armed forces. An example of this seems to be the gentleman named Niazi who posted above. I have only come across this name once -- Lt. General Niazi who commanded Pakistan's forces in East Pakistan and surrendered to India's Lt. Gen. Jagjit Singh Arora in 1971. Lt. Gen. Niazi was in the British Indian army and won a Military Cross for valor fighting for the British. On looking at the other posts of Mr. Niazi, it seems he is indeed a nephew of Lt. Gen. Niazi and himself lives in the United States. His post above shows a degree of identification with the American drone attackers. He refers to the drones being "expensive" and says the Americans will "perk up" if you shoot them down. His 'blood boils' not at those who are attacking Pakistani territory but at the Pakistani victims of the drone attacks. I don't mean to make an ad hominem argument with respect to Mr. Niazi but only referred to him as an example of the reason why Pakistan remains undefended against the Americans -- the reason being that both India's and Pakistan's armies are more loyal to their white colonial masters -- past and future -- than to their own people, though this problem of loyalty to white foreigners exists in the civilian population as well. There are millions of Indians living in the United States, from civilian and military families in India and most of them are just as loyal to the Americans as Mr. Niazi is and hate any patriotism for India as Mr. Niazi does for Pakistan and the same is true of their family members in India. I have no reason to believe things are very different for Pakistanis. India similarly remains undefended against the United States.

Contrast the behavior of Indians and Pakistanis with that of Iraqis; the Iraqi citizens' militias, during the second invasion of Iraq in 2003, charged American tanks in cars and SUVs and were cut down by the TENS OF THOUSANDS without the Americans suffering a single casualty. No amount of advanced weaponry will be of use if there is no desire to defend your country against whites. The Americans are depending upon this characteristic of Indians and Pakistanis in their plans to occupy and re-colonise the subcontinent. I have said in post # 1 above that the recent terror attacks in Mumbai were meant to facilitate these plans. The U.S. government does not keep its sponsorship of terrorism in the subcontinent a secret. Mitchell Shivers, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defence for Asian & Pacific Security Affairs, gave the following testimony to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee on 25 June 2008: ".... elements of extremism and terrorism are at work within Pakistan sponsored by the usa and India." ( http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2008/11/17/pakistan-the-next-us-target ). The same is the case with terrorism in India. The United States' sponsorship of terrorism is the least of what it does. I have written about its suppression of India's research and development and its spending hundreds of millions of dollars per year on 24-hour satellite surveillance and crimes against India's greatest scientist and the greatest living Indian for over 31 years.

In Pakistan there are movements -- Jihadi movements, Madarasa-educated youngsters, etc. -- which do motivate many Pakistanis to fight white aggressors. So there is hope for Pakistan. In India, however, even such movements are lacking.

Perhaps I am being unfair to senior Pakistani military officers. Just before the second Gulf War, there was a report of an Egyptian dignitary visiting Pakistan saying that Pakistan and Egypt will act together to save the Islamic Ummah, apparently the plan being for Egyptian planes to deliver Pakistani nuclear weapons to European capitals, if necessary. But the Americans came to know of the plan and it had to be aborted. It is more likely that I am being too generous to Pakistani military officers, considering they would not even defend Pakistan's own territory against the United States. Exactly the same is the case with Indians; Indians both in and outside government eagerly participate in the United States' crimes against India and their blood boils at any one who disturbs this master-slave arrangement. India's only hope is in the nuclear destruction of New Delhi.

 

[kaal2009]

In India's army, the officers and men identify with and take pride in their regiments and regimental history and their regimental history invariably goes back to the British officers who founded or commanded the regiment and their exploits. This way they feel they are one with the British and the power and military successes of the British victors is also theirs and they do not have to feel they are like the inferior native rulers' armies the British so thoroughly routed. This feeling of being in the same army with the British is central to their morale and their ability to fight well and they cling to it because otherwise they will be like all the other inferior Indians who lost and were routed and will have no morale to speak of.

The Indian Civil Service (ICS), with which the British ruled India, was renamed Indian Administrative Service (IAS) after India's so-called 'Independence' and the IAS has often been called the "steel frame" which holds India together, because the IAS also have their loyalties rooted in their history as the British rulers of India with a few Indians mixed in. The present day members of the IAS still see themselves as agents of whites (with the Americans having replaced the British) ruling India. Their connection to present day white countries is live and continuing and they continue to receive instructions/orders, as well as money, from their white masters through RAW whereas in the army, the connection with the British is only through old faded photographs and trophies and tales of battles and campaigns.

The armed forces can transfer their pride and loyalties to indigenous India from British colonial India if the indigenous India is seen as headed toward military supremacy -- that is, nuclear supremacy -- over the strongest white country and this can become the anchor of their morale. Since their connection to the British is through old faded photographs and trophies, they are not so bound to the current imperial power, the United States, as the civil servants are.

Insofar as Pakistan's army has maintained the same regimental system, the above explains why they have difficulty shooting down American drones; it can be termed broadly a problem of morale. Military entities without a British history or present or recent American connections should have no problems of morale, just equipment. (Note that Mr. Niazi above referred to having "our proxies" shoot them down; why should he even think of having proxies defend the country rather than the armed forces themselves?).

 

[maqsad]

vi) In case of a full scale nuclear war between India and the United States, India will survive, the United States will not.

I find that extremely hard to believe. From what I know the US has more than 10,000 ICBMs which are all MIRVed and nuclear tipped. I doubt India even has 1000 anti-missile projectiles in stock. Neither does India have any ICBMs that can cross the Pacific Ocean. On top of that the US also has nuclear armed subs patrolling in all the oceans. I really can't see how this can be done.

 

[kaal2009]

The reference to a full scale war was to a nuclear war in which India will carry out a nuclear first strike on the United States after India has built an arsenal of ten thousand nuclear warheads and the means to deliver them to the continental United States. The details of such plans are available elsewhere.

 

[maqsad]

An example of this seems to be the gentleman named Niazi who posted above. I have only come across this name once -- Lt. General Niazi who commanded Pakistan's forces in East Pakistan and surrendered to India's Lt. Gen. Jagjit Singh Arora in 1971. Lt. Gen. Niazi was in the British Indian army and won a Military Cross for valor fighting for the British. On looking at the other posts of Mr. Niazi, it seems he is indeed a nephew of Lt. Gen. Niazi and himself lives in the United States.

Actually Niazi is quite a common name in Pakistan, in fact it might very well be a pathan sub-tribe I'm not sure. But you are correct on another account, Pakistani military personnel very often look towards a green card for themselves or at least their families as part of their retirment package from Uncle Sam after decades of loyal colonial servitude.

And as far as this Niazi person goes, he's probabaly pretending to be a Niazi and slipping in anti-pathan and pro-us comments as part of his "mission" to influence public opinion. It's quite a stretch of the imagination to conclude he is a nephew of THE General Niazi. I doubt he is even a Pakistani.

 

[kaal2009]

The question is -- when it comes to the white man, are Pakistanis any less slavish than Indians are?

According to a report in the Wall Street Journal, the Americans are now providing live video feeds from the drones to Pakistani army officers and making them participants in the drone attacks. The Americans got the idea from what I wrote above, that a feeling of being in the same army as the British is central to the morale of Indian army officers and men and their ability to fight well, that both Indian and Pakistani armies are more loyal to their white colonial masters -- past and future -- than to their own people, that the Indians are all too happy at the prospect of the occupation and recolonisation of the subcontinent by the Americans because they had felt orphaned when the British left India.

The slavish behaviour and loyalty toward the white man exists because the native armies were thoroughly routed by the British. They were routed because of the technological advantage the British had. The use of drones by the Americans -- with operators sitting in Nevada pushing the buttons to launch missiles on Pakistan -- shows that the technological gap has only widened, not narrowed, in the hundreds of years that have passed since the British routed the natives. And the natives make no serious attempt to close the gap. Whatever technology they have is taken from the white master and they are quite happy to continue this way.

The latest example of this is India signing a multibillion dollar deal with Boeing for eight maritime reconnaissance aircraft instead of pumping the money into indigenous research and development.

 

[kaal2009]

India gets about 70% of its defence equipment from Russia. In the early 1990s, Yevgeny Primakov, who used to be Foreign Minister and, before that, KGB chief, suggested a Russia, China, India alliance. I applauded that in a letter to the press which the Indian Express published under the heading "Grab This Opportunity". Upon that, the then Indian prime minister sent the head of India's submarine-launched ballistic missile program to Russia to get help, where he died. When I pointed out in a letter to the press that this was the "help" the Russians had provided, the Indian government briefly woke up, but only briefly. The Indian press recently reported that Russia had offered several nuclear-powered attack submarines to India but not to China because there is a lot of "trust" between Russia and India but not between Russia and China. I pointed out that it will be the easiest thing in the world for the Russians to install devices in them that will enable them to track them and -- in keeping with the "business" relationship between Russian and American intelligence agencies going back many decades, which a former senior C.I.A. official has described, under which the KGB assassinated visiting Indian prime minister Shastri, during his Tashkent meeting with Pakistan's Ayub, at the C.I.A.'s request because he had given a go ahead to India's nuclear weapons program -- enable the Americans to track them, too. Indians continue their dependence on the Russians as Pakistan does on America and a C.I.A. specialist on the subcontinent a few months ago said that Pakistan's defences have been electronically neutralised to allow the ingress of Predator drones (this was before the drone attacks started), that its nuclear weapons are totally under U.S. control and that Pakistan's military is quite cooperative in all this. But soon both India and Pakistan may be American colonies. A Russian intelligence agent has started a thread to make Pakistanis start thinking of starting to buy defence equipment from Russia because the Indians may stop buying from them after what I wrote about the nuclear submarines. But there is no solution except indigenous research and development.