E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSBy Robert Windrem
NBC News Investigative Producer for Special Projects
As U.S.-Pakistani relations spiral downward, the specter of a showdown between the increasingly antagonistic allies is garnering more attention, including the worst-case scenario of the U.S. attempting to “snatch” Pakistan’s 100-plus nuclear weapons if it feared they were about to fall into the wrong hands.
That would be a disastrous miscalculation, former Pakistani President and army chief Pervez Musharraf told NBC News, saying that such an incursion would lead to “total confrontation” between the United States and Pakistan.
Ispr / EPA
A Medium Range Ballistic Missile Hatf V (Ghauri) missile takes off during a test fire from an undisclosed location in Pakistan on Dec. 21 in this photo distributed by the Pakistani military. The liquid-fuel missile can carry both conventional and nuclear warheads and has a range of more than 800 miles.
Privately, current and former U.S. officials say that ensuring the security of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons has long been a high national security priority, even before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, and that plans have been drawn up for dealing with worst-case scenarios in Pakistan.
The greatest success of the U.S. war on terrorism – the military operation that killed Osama bin Laden in his safehouse in Pakistan in May – has fueled the concerns about Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, increasing suspicions among U.S. officials that he had support within the ISI, Pakistan’s intelligence service, and emboldening those in Washington who believe an orchestrated campaign of lightning raids to secure Pakistan’s nukes could succeed.
It’s no secret that the United States has a plan to try to grab Pakistan’s nuclear weapons -- if and when the president believes they are a threat to either the U.S. or U.S. interests. Among the scenarios seen as most likely: Pakistan plunging into internal chaos, terrorists mounting a serious attack against a nuclear facility, hostilities breaking out with India or Islamic extremists taking charge of the government or the Pakistan army.
In the aftermath of the bin Laden raid, U.S. military officials have testified before Congress about the security of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and the threat posed by “loose nukes” – nuclear weapons or materials outside the government’s control. And earlier Pentagon reports also outline scenarios in which U.S. forces would intervene to secure nuclear weapons that were in danger of falling into the wrong hands.
But out of fear of further antagonizing an important ally, officials have simultaneously tried to tone down the rhetoric by stressing progress made by Islamabad on the security front.
Such discussions of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, now believed to consist of as many as 115 nuclear bombs and missile warheads, have gotten the attention of current and former Pakistani officials. In an interview with NBC News early this month, Musharraf warned that a snatch-and-grab operation would lead to all-out war between the countries, calling it “total confrontation by the whole nation against whoever comes in.”
Michael Thomas / AP
Former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf met with Texas Gov. Rick Perry on July 12 in Austin to exchange ideas about improving the economy and discuss the strained relationship between the U.S. and Pakistani governments. Musharraf has been critical of the White House's recent suspension of $800 million in U.S. aid to the Pakistani military, saying the decreased aid will hurt his country and hinder its fight against terrorism.
“These are assets which are the pride of Pakistan, assets which are dispersed and very secure in very secure places, guarded by a corps of 18,000 soldiers,” said a combative Musharraf, who led Pakistan for nearly a decade and is again running for president. “… (This) is not an army which doesn't know how to fight. This is an army which has fought three wars. Please understand that.”
Pervez Hoodboy, Pakistan’s best known nuclear physicist and a human rights advocate, rarely agrees with the former president. But he, too, says a U.S. attempt to take control of Pakistan’s nukes would be foolhardy.
“They are said to be hidden in tunnels under mountains, in cities, as well as regular air force and army bases,” he said. “A U.S. snatch operation could trigger war; it should never be attempted.”
Despite such comments, interviews with current and former U.S. officials, military reports and even congressional testimony indicate that Pakistan’s weaponry has been the subject of continuing discussions, scenarios, war games and possibly even military exercises by U.S. intelligence and special operations forces regarding so-called “snatch-and-grab” operations.
“It’s safe to assume that planning for the worst-case scenario regarding Pakistan nukes has ready taken place inside the U.S. government,” said Roger Cressey, former deputy director of counterterrorism in the Clinton and Bush White House and an NBC News consultant. “This issue remains one of the highest priorities of the U.S. intelligence community ... and the White House.”
Carefully worded assurances
Mindful of the growing distrust and suspicions between Washington and Islamabad, U.S. officials have publicly tried to defuse concerns that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal could be compromised. Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Congress two weeks ago that Pakistan’s atomic arsenal has become “physically more secure” and the U.S. has seen “training improve” for personnel charged with securing the weapons.
But does “more secure” and “improved” training mean the Pakistanis have met U.S. standards?
Jeffrey T. Richelson, an intelligence historian, has written extensively about the possibility of a U.S. military operation aimed at Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, notably in his 2009 book “Defusing Armageddon.” The book focuses on the U.S. Nuclear Emergency Search Team (NEST), which might play leading a role in disarming Pakistani weapons along with elements of the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC).
The nuts-and-bolts of how such an operation would work – such as whether teams would attempt to disarm or destroy the weapons – remain highly classified.
But Richelson notes that without referring to Pakistan by name, Gen. Peter Pace, then-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in 2006 discussed two types of operations where in which the U.S. military would seek to keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of al-Qaida or other militants.
Detailed in a military policy document titled “National Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction,” the two scenarios were: “elimination operations” – defined as “operations systematically to locate, characterize, secure, disable and/or destroy a State or non-State actor’s WMD programs and related capabilities” – and “interdiction operations” – finding and seizing nuclear devices or nuclear material it has been removed from a nation’s storage bunkers but not yet delivered to a terrorist group.
Richelson also obtained an unclassified PowerPoint presentation titled “Detecting, Identifying and Localizing WMD” by the Office of Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict (SOLIC). In it were slides referring to “clandestine or low-visibility special operations taken to: locate, seize, destroy, capture, recover or render safe WMD,” either on land or sea. He said such a mission has been a special operations forces priority since 2002.
Neither the report nor the PowerPoint presentation specify where such operations would be considered, but Richelson says that both were prepared with Pakistan in mind.
“The focus on Pakistan,” he wrote, “is the result of its being both the least stable of the nine nuclear weapons states and the one where there has been significant support for Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida, not only among the general population but also within the military and intelligence forces.”
Publicly, U.S. officials don’t want to embarrass or infuriate Pakistani officials by suggesting such an operation would be possible, a point brought home in a White House press conference on April 29, 2009. After President Barack Obama spoke of the confidence he had in the Pakistani Army’s ability to secure the nuclear weapons, NBC News’ Chuck Todd began to ask if the U.S. military would step in and seize weapons that were at risk.
Obama quickly cut him off. “I’m not going to engage in hypotheticals of that sort. I feel confident that nuclear arsenal will remain out of militant hands, OK?”
'All nuclear matters are controlled by the army'
While the U.S. has a non-proliferation policy that aims for the elimination of Third World weaponry, it also has been working with Islamabad to minimize the current threat, sending an estimated $100 million to Pakistan since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks to improve the safety and security of the Pakistani nukes.
But Pakistan never permitted U.S. officials to visit the weapons bunkers or see how the U.S.-purchased equipment was working. In fact, Richelson writes, the Pakistanis have gone so far as to set up decoy bunkers to throw off anyone trying to keep track of the arsenal.
And physical security and protection from terrorists only addresses one aspect of the threat, Hoodboy said.
“Technology determines safety, but only partly,” he told NBC News. “Ultimately it depends upon the men who have control over nuclear weapons. … Governments come, governments go. But all nuclear matters are controlled by the army. The important question is whether the army has total, absolute control over its nukes. I have no idea whether this control is absolute, and doubt how anyone can know for sure.”
There are additional reasons to be concerned. In July 2009, for example, the journal of the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point reported that “home-grown terrorists” had tried to enter Pakistani nuclear facilities three times between 2007 and 2008, when Pakistan was wracked by rioting and a series of destructive suicide bombings.
Shaun Gregory, director of the Pakistan Security Research Center at the University of Bradford in England, wrote of the attacks.
“These have included an attack on the nuclear missile storage facility at Sarghoda on Nov. 1, 2007, an attack on Pakistan’s nuclear air base at Kamra by a suicide bomber on Dec. 10, 2007, and, perhaps most significantly, the Aug. 20, 2008, attack when Pakistani Taliban suicide bombers blew up several entry points to one of the armament complexes at the Wah cantonment, considered one of Pakistan’s main nuclear weapons assembly sites.”
Pakistani officials have played down the seriousness of such attacks, noting that the attackers were unable to enter what are large military bases, much less penetrate the inner defenses.
Musharraf, who was president of Pakistan during the three reported attacks, dismissed the threat in talking with NBC News. Asked if terrorists were targeting Pakistan’s nuclear assets, he replied, “I don't think so. I don't think they are trying actively to get to our nuclear assets. And we have no such intelligence. Never.”
His statement is, at best, a disingenuous and narrow reading of the intelligence, according to former senior U.S. intelligence officials, who like the others quoted in this article spoke on condition of anonymity. These officials point to an August 2001 campfire meeting between bin Laden and his successor, Ayman al Zawahiri, and two Pakistani nuclear scientists, part of a so-called Islamic charity called UTN, on the other. With planning for the 9/11 attacks nearly complete, the two al-Qaida leaders wanted a tutorial on nuclear weapons development, according to U.S. intelligence reports.
Tenet's tense meeting
Then-CIA Director George Tenet, in fact, wrote in his memoir, “At the Center of the Storm,” of a tense discussion he had with Musharraf in Islamabad shortly after the U.S. found out about the meeting.
“After a few pleasantries … I launched into a description of the campfire meeting between (O)sama bin Laden, al-Zawahiri and the UTN leaders,” Tenet wrote. “‘Mr. President,’ I said, ‘you cannot imagine the outrage there would be in my country if it were learned that Pakistan is coddling scientists who are helping bin Laden acquire a nuclear weapon. Should such a device ever be used, the full fury of the American people would be focused on whoever helped al-Qaida in its cause.”
In a testimony before Congress four months ago, the CIA’s new director, Gen. David Petraeus, left little doubt the U.S. still fears the worst. “There are certainly elements in Pakistan, the Pakistani Taliban and several other varieties of elements who generally have symbiotic relationships, the most extreme of which might, indeed, value access to nuclear weapons or other weapons that could cause enormous loss of life,” said Petraeus, then commander of NATO and U.S. forces in Afghanistan.
Like others in the U.S. government, however, Petraeus felt duty bound to note, “There is considerable security for the Pakistani nuclear weapons.” But he appeared to choose his words with care. “Considerable” does not mean “state of the art,” for example.
Not everyone thinks the U.S. is very worried about Pakistan’s nukes falling into the wrong hands. Zia Mian, a colleague of Hoodboy’s and director of the Project on Peace and Security in South Asia at Princeton, said war gaming and exercising for dire situations is something the Pentagon and CIA do all the time.
“The U.S. exercised global nuclear war. They’ve exercised attacking Iran. You’ve got to be ready,” Mian argues. “It suggests to me there are people whose job is to be worried. So when someone asks you, you say you’re worried. But when you’re reading the WikiLeaks disclosure, when you read embassy talking points, the nuclear weapons barely figure.”
Of course, the main question is if, in the last resort, the U.S. did attempt to “snatch” Pakistan’s weapons, would it work? Hoodboy thinks it’s unlikely to have the intended effect and could very well lead to one of two scenarios, both with potentially disastrous outcomes.
“An American attack on Pakistan's nuclear production or storage sites would be extremely dangerous and counterproductive,” he said. “By comparison the bin Laden operation involved only minor risks. Even if a single Pakistani nuke (out of roughly 100) escapes destruction, that last one could be unimaginably dangerous.” Hoodboy added that no seems to have thought through another scenario, one where there is confusion about who snatched the bomb. “The situation is more uncertain than even this. For one, it might trigger nuclear war with India, even if India was not involved in the snatch.”
Have a story tip? Click here to submit it to Open Channel editors
Leave a Comment:
Just how stupid and arrogant IS the US Empire? It's not Pax Americana, it's Pox Americana!
The Taliban and Haqqani live in Pakistan. The Taliban really want Pakistan instead of Afghanistan. So you think that the US should just let people attack us? That is your reasoning. Well we won't just stand by like the rest of the world who do nothing but criticize and complain. Except for a few brave countries who do not want to be victims of terrorism.
Do you have any idea what this world would be like if the Taliban took over Pakistan and started killing millions of people? They will kill anyone. They are not people that talking to works. They kill their own kind just to kill. Did you comment on the Taliban hanging a 8 year old boy 2 weeks ago? Is that ok? I have fought these cowardly, power hungry pieces of human garbage. And I would protect my country by any means and I wouldn't care who liked it or not. Just wake up to reality, this is not a love sit in, this is a big boy world. Tough decisions have to be made. GOD BLESS THE US and all our soldiers who are fighting for their country.
Not all of us. However, this has got to be one of the stupidest plans to date. While we're at it, why don't we snatch the nuclear missiles from Russia, China, North Korea, and everyone else. I know, we'll send Superman.
DAK makes an inane post as far as content goes. Here's the deal: Between the two powers, Pakistan is far more arrogant, and way less responsible. Sorry. That's the way it is. When you can't run your own country (and yes, the US can and Pakistan can't, by comparisson), you lose the right to get all huffed up when someone else comes along and handles your own problems. Too bad.
Now, on the topic of stealing 100 nukes? COME ON! WHO SERIOUSLY WROTE THAT PLAN? Lay off the James Bond a little. It would have been more realistic to ask if the US would simply invade Pakistan to prevent nukes from landing in terrorist hands. No, is the simple answer. Why? Because as bad as relations are, the US, Russia AND China would never let that happen. In fact, you'd see India invade long before we got there.
Like I said, someone has been watching too much G. I. Joe cartoon reruns. Yes, you can send a special ops team into Pakistan and kill most any single target. But to steal 100 nukes is such a childlike concept I can't even begin to comprehend how someone could even seriously write this as a US strategy.
For a start the US is not seriously considering snatching anyone's nuclear weapons. That said nobody can argue that Pakistan is not presently on an extremely worrying tragectory that if left unchecked will result in either the world's largest failed state, an Islamic theocracy, or a military dictatorship. The latter is the most likely however even were the Taliban to take over the government of Pakistan and gain control over the nuclear arsenal it is extremely unlikely that they would then allow anyone to detonate a nuclear weapon on US soil. For a start each reactor has a distinct signature so there wouldn't be any doubt where the weapon came from. Secondly, the immediate aftermath would be a retaliatory US nuclear strike that would essentially wipe Pakistan off the face of the planet. The Taliban make use of suicide attackers however the leaders are not themselves suicidal.
Do not Misunderstand this please, this is a contingency plan, "IF" the Pakistani government destabilizes and Extremists "Look" like they are about to take control, I'm positive that we will allow the Pakistani government to "die" before we attempt this as a last resort to curb the threat of nuclear attack by Extremists.
You, sir, are an imbecile. DAK, Move to Pakistan or under whatever rock you live that will protect you from a nuclear attack. I simply cannot believe your naivete. Don't bother the rest of us with your drivel: you are never going to be taken seriously.
The day a Pakistani nuke kills Americans is the day our country removes Pakistan as an inhabitable location for at least another 20,000 years. Make an example that won't ever be forgotten or don't expect to be re-elected.
I just hope our collective, proverbial , "camel's back" is strong enough to outlast this maniacal administration that the loonies and the easily fooled, have put in place.
God help us make it to Jan. 2013, and pray that it won't be too late. BHO=POS
Roscoe..amen. I have not seen such a collection of idiots since Loony Tunes.
Chris,
If Packastan nuked something US Obama would apologize for letting US property get in the way of the stalwart Pakistani nuke.
Pakistan should not have nuclear weapons, and should be disarmed in the same fashion as Iraq.
They LIED to us about not knowing where Bin Laden was. They knew, and protected him all along.
I hope to hell we aren't giving them any money, after the way they treated us. Scumbag Bin Laden killed 3000 innocent American citizens, and they helped him to hide out for nearly a decade.
They can either cooperate with us or go to hell.
I am an old intelligence analyst (though of the North Korean persuasion) and had studied many of these issues (albeit pertaining primarily with chemical, biological, and "ditry" nuclear weapons) for a number of years. North Korea had a great deal of input and received a great deal of missile technology in return from Khan in this matter, so it is likelyu very pertinent.
1) This is a situation where 100% mission success is required. If only one device is not captured, it will be immediately used or will be immediately transferred to terrorists for use in order to prevent its capture.
2) Such a "focused" strike would require simultaneous penetration of numerous areas of the country. The geography of the country means that this will never happen. These weapons are not stored in an ungarded compound, as was bin Laden, but are in fortified, heavily guarded, special-purpose facilities. These are not potential SEAL targets (except for reconnaissance), but would require combined arms and air superiority. I have seen generals overreach and seen the consequences --- remember the disastrous "can't fail" attempt to rescue the Iranian hostages?
3) One thing North Korea has contributed to Pakistan is the "shell game". If the North Korean model is followed, the 100+ nukes (they increase by about 1 every two months) are stored in a minimum of 100 facilities with varying numbers of warheads at each site. The facilities are fully guarded and fully functional, but at any given time 70 of them are empty. Even the troops guarding them do not know if they are in use. The Pakistanis have sophisticated enough radar to know when there are no reconnaissance satellites overhead and use those "windows" to shuffle the weapons between sites. This means that all 70+ sites would have to be attacked simultaneously. This is too tall an order for a "snatch and grab."
4) People always forget that nuclear weapons are the weapons of losers. This is taught to every military man in every war college in the world. If you paint any country with nukes into a small enough corner, they will use their nukes as a last resort. All their weapons systems are designed and hardened or hidden with this in mind. It's the "if we lose we'll take the bastards with us" mentality. Since it is India that is targeted (though some targeting may have been shifted to places like Bagram AB) it is likely that millions of uninvolved innocents would die.
5) We have far, far too much confidence in high technology. For my part that is too many eggs in too few baskets. We seem to think that things like MOABs, "Bunker Buster" bombs, and even nuclear weapons can destroy almost any target. That could not be further from the truth. Some are too large to be carried by stealth aircraft, others so large they have to be carried by low-flying transports, and others require that immense numbers of innocent civilians be killed along with the target. In North Korea, in the old days of the 1960's and 1970's, we planned on neutralizing a lot of North Korean facilities by using nerve gas and possibly even biological weapons such as anthrax. We have given up those wespons by treaty. We can't even use cluster bombs without risking a huge international backlash since we are one of the few nations what have not ratified the anti-cluster munitions treaty. In short, the idea that we can breach any bunker with current munitions is a wholesale myth.
6) Both India and Pakistan are nuclear armed. And presumption that Pakistan was using or was about to use CBR weapons against ANY target, even in retaliation for a US raid, would prompt truly massive nuclear response by India who would love to rid the world of their long-time enemy who sponsored the Mumbai terrorist raid and the more recent bombings. We have virtually no control over India since Pakistan is our "friend" and India is still our "enemy" since 1948. The Indian government sees the US as a country with no credibility and a great deal of animosity toward India.
While every country has contingency plans for every thing they can think of, most of them represent the last measure of desparation when every other military and diplomatic option has failed. Virtualy all of them are suicide missions. When it comes down to brass tacks, the US military would never decide to launch a large combined arms attach against virtually all of Pakistan with the greatest liklihood being that virtually all the troops would be casualties, nuclear war could easily result, and it is highly unlikely that the mission objectives would be more than partially met in the best case and completely fubar in the worst case (again think about the attempted rescue of the Iranian hostages.) Cooler heads would mean that this would never be attempted unless the warheads were all on warheads and ready to go. And then it would be too late already.
While some people may find juicy articles like this exciting to discuss in a public forum this is exactly the kind of "state secret" that should be kept as such. What good is this information doing being public knowledge other than to fuel the anger of people in Pakistan, what good can come of making a plan like this a public debate?
Are all of the "pro nuculear war" advocates really helping the conversation? Is this kind of discussion improving our standing in the world? What next, should we publicly debate the use of spies or proposed cia operations as if our interference in other soverign nations own interest is nothing more than entertainment for our own uneducated citizens?
Hopefully the next "leader of the free world" will be far more responsible with their use of the power that comes with leadership and less gung-ho to threaten or insult other nations with public wargames.
We need to quit funding, and go about disarming the Middle East. Those that beleive we can turn them into Americans are wasting their time and our money. Most of us enjoy being Americans, and I am sure the Arab countries feel the same about their cultures and respective countries. A constant state of war seems to be their history for all of recorded time. If we are going to be involved in that part of the world, it needs to be warlike and brief. For instance, I had no problem with going into Iraq. However, leveling Bagdad and perhaps raising a large sign with the message that we Americans would be back if another problem arose and then leaving them to their own devices might have been better than the past ten years of maimed soldiers.
If there is a plan to do this there should be no discussion of this in the media. Doesn't matter if the talking heads drone on, but the government should not acknowledge any of this. Furthermore, why is it that the US has to always take the lead in the kind of operation? China and Russia are the other two big boys and they have as much to lose as we do, Russia has more Islamic attacks happening than we do in the US and it would be much easier to move a Pak Nuke to Russia or China than to here. There just have not been an attack in Russia as big as the one at the WTC. Also, China should be the country that deals with North Korean problems, they are the ones that helped this regime get to where it is and they should be the country that is held responsible for reigningthat little tyrant in.
arrogant? Dak? you need some chill pills? try living a year in Youngstown, before you call America an empire. Last time i checked, we are a Republic...
Absolutely right Thinknaboutit. How the hell does something like this get leaked? For what motive? It makes us look like fools. Chris's analysis is spot on, the mission is virtually impossible do pull off anyway, but it still bug the heck out of me that someone in the administration leaks this stuff.
I'm not so convinced it is someone in the administration that would leak something like this. This to me seems more of a "don't vote for him he can't keep secrets" move. Which motivates me to vote for Obama rather than those who admit their only goal is to defeat Obama at all costs. After all if people are so willing to destroy their country for political gain they have no business being at the helm.
if pakistan continues on its course why not?
f'IN a!!
if they don't wanna cooperate for the Population and are resisting for "party" reasons and not making good desisions due to their "party" ....
..... .... wait... isn't that Treason!?
Yes and in other news, Batman will be solving the national cochroach problem. Superman will be providing safe clean power to every house hold. And Jason Bourn will be the next President of the United States.
BTW, those three things I just mentioned are more likely in the scope of probability than the United States being able to capture/destroy 100+ nukes in Pakistan. Heck, the article even stated "It is believed that they have at least X number of nukes." That alone tells you that they are not 100% sure they know how many there are. Miss one, and the mission is 100% failure.
Was this article created by the same author that wrote the one regarding the US using squirrels to spy on Iran?
Ha Ha Ha - We did it again....announced "top secret" plans before execution. This will REALLY take them by surprise now.....won't it? LOL
Henry Eckstein
How about North Korea tough guy? You ready to reignite that fire, I bet your trust in China would quickly diminish once you open that can of worms.
Excellent posts by Derek and CHris make is unnecessary for me to say a thing.
In the worst-case scenario - don't secure the nukes - just destroy them in bunker. No nuclear detonation - but it would render the facilities and surrounding areas unsafe to occupy. It would solve more than one problem.
I agree Sambodotom but in the wrong hands, like a document, cold bring the downfall of the free
world. World domination is what's going on here. Russia's Putin is in there somewhere.
Just my opinion!
Chris,
Pakistanis "sophisticated" radar? Are you talking about the ones that couldn't detect the Navy Seals were on to kill Bin Laden? ;-)
Sorry, had to!!!
Most of you are idiots! Ever heard of the phrase "leave well enough alone". I don't know why Americans have this view that we are invincible and nobody can stop us. If that's the case then.....
1. How come we didn't stop those planes on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001?
2. If we're so big and bad... why have we been at war since Sept. 11, 2001? I though we could wipe out our enemies in one swoop?
3. Why did it supposedly take 10 years to kill a guy that lived in plain view. What..you don't think we've had CIA in Pakistan since the 1980's?
So, dumbed down arrogant Americans..get off your high horse before Russia or China wipes US off the map. Remember..they have nukes too! (and most of our debt)
Mostly agree with your points Kerbe26, but you are wrong about who holds most of the U.S. Debt. Americans own the majority of America's national debt, foreign governments own less than half.
Using the Intelligence Analyst Methodology figure this out (I was previously Strategic and Tactical Nuclear Weapons (also worked on a Nuclear/Chemical Weapons Security Project, as a Project Manager), Biological Weapons (Epidemiology), Chemical Weapons, Missiles, got shifted to a Military Intelligence Position (USSR Tactical and Strategic Intelligence Analysis), Shifted to US Military Asymmetric Warfare "Middle East Qualified" (including providing or verifying Intelligence, Insurgency/Counter Insurgency Warfare, and CT (Counter Terrorist), FID, DA, etc..) :
As an Islamic Nation, Pakistan MUST adhere to the Current Islamic Laws that are based on the Holy Koran (Quran). With the 109 Suras (verses) of the 114 Suras of the Holy Koran (Quran) Calling All Islamic Believers to War Against the Christians, Jews, Unbelievers for those Death Penalty Crimes Against Allah and His Prophet., AND the Death Penalty for Islamic Believers that do not participate in the War Against the Christians, Jews, Unbelievers for those Death Penalty Crimes Against Allah and His Prophet., AND any Islamic Believer that Collaborates with the Christians, Jews, Unbelievers "Die a Horrible Murdering". ALSO stated are the Mandatory Islamic Tithes of the (1.5 Billion) Islamic Believers Worldwide to support the War Against the Christians, Jews, Unbelievers for those Death Penalty Crimes Against Allah and His Prophet (US Department of State, US Intelligence Agencies, US Military, Foreign Intelligence Agencies, etc. already "Followed the Money", and know that the money is NOT used to build Mosques or Islamic Cultural Centers (reason the Imam of NYC had to go begging for money at Bahrain to build the Islamic Cultural Center at NYC.) or "Peaceful Purposes") with the money being "funnelled"thru "Non Establish Financial Institutions" (the Imams at the Mosques Worldwide) to the Jihadists (Terrorists aka the Worldwide Islamic Military).).
If the Government of Pakistan does not obey the Current Islamic Law, Holy Koran (Quran) the majority of the People (Islamic Believers) will Revolt like, Egypt (Mubarak a Collaborator to the Christians (US) and Jews (Israel) per Muslim Brotherhood), Libya (Gaddaffi a Collaborator to the Christians (US and US Allies)), Syria (Assad a Collaborator to the Unbelievers (Russian Federation Base) per AQS)*, Bahrain (Al-Khalifa Collaborator to the Christians (US Base), Yemen (Saleh a Collaborator to the Christians (US), etc..
* You can see how they are hypocrites as they are getting their weapons indirectly from the Russian Federation thru Fundamentalist Islamic Iran.
Islam used the Massacres (hundreds a day, millions to date) of the Peaceful Moderate African Believers at the Sudan by the Arabic Omani Muslims for not attacking the African Christians of the Southern Sudan (Darfur) to set the example Worldwide that there can be NO such thing as "Peaceful Moderate" Islamic Believers. The f**ked up do nothing UN/UA (African Union) mission my men, women, and myself got assigned to as "Observers Only".
Also the current example of the Al Quada (Al Shabab) at Somalia refusing to allow any assistance to the starving at Somalia. They would rather have the Somalis starve to death than allow non Islamic outside interference. (some you think it is funny as h3ll for some old guy running the Mogadishu Mile (running for your life), it was not, unlike the movie, Blackhawk Down, they were still shooting at us as we were running, thank your President Clinton for getting us into that UN Mission (Cluster F**k) and authorizing (demanding) that mission (grab a warlord, instead of just bombing that building after confirming the warlord was in the building thru LSR-D).).
In 2010 the Al Quada Somalia (Al Shabab) took over Somalia, and started bringing in more weapons supplied by Fundamentalist Islamic Iran (supplied to Iran by the Chinese and Russian Federation), some of the weapons and ammunition are manufactured at Fundamentalist Islamic Iran under license from the Chinese and Russian Federation (the information above, that is not in the link below is almost classified (I left out some information)):
Somalia resembling Afghanistan under Taliban
Some experts say the similarities are no accident
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38802019/ns/world_news-africa
We are currently listening very intently at the local Mosques, to see if the Imams are going to incite their Islamic Believers again to start coordinated violent actions against Christians, Jews, Unbelievers Worldwide again (they do this every Ramadan, and End of Ramadan(EID), reason for most US Military Installations, US Embassies, etc. Worldwide going to Threat Condition Alpha and other measures that you have no need to know about.).
All of you (including the Chinese) have a good Ramadan (Islamic Fasting).
Maybe if all of Pakistans Nuclear Weapons accidentally exploded at Pakistan this would: 1. Prevent the Pakistanis Taliban, Army of Islam Pakistan (not the Pakistani Military), etc. from getting their hands on Pakistans Nuclear Arsenal. 2. Get rid of most of the Islamic Terrorists and those that support them (the majority of the Pakistanis, even if only thru Mandatory Islamic Tithes)., 3. End the Pakistanis Training of Terrorists (Jihadists of the Worldwide Islamic Military) and Exporting Terrorism., 4. End the Conflicts between Pakistan and India (and everyone else around Pakistan)., 5. etc.. Of course this would also destroy the $1 Billion USD US Embassy (Disneyland Resort and Spa) built by President Obama's Political Appointee Holbrooke, like the one President Obama's Political Appointee Eikenberry wanted to build here (Afghanistan) and the one that was built at Iraq also ($1 Billion USDs, not including payroll, maintenance, utilities, security, etc..). And US Citizens wonder why the US Civilians (US Department of State, etc.) do not know jack sh!t about what is going on outside the US Embassies ("Little Americas"), as depicted in the movie "Green Zone".
(Unclassified) As far as 100% locating of the Pakistani Nuclear Weapons, even if they are scattered throughout Pakistan. The Israelis attempted to hide their Nuclear Weapons Program underground also, so did the USSR, and that did not work back then either, the US Technology back then detected each nuclear weapon and the potential yields, think of what we have now (yes, Chris-749391, I am talking around those classified matters, but making darn sure that nothing classified is disclosed). (Unclassified) The threat of Israel using their Nuclear Weapons to stop the attacks by the Arab League of Nations is what is keeping peace between the Arab League of Nations (attackers) and Israel (defenders). Too bad most of the younger generations of the Middle East (coming into power) have forgotten. (Unclassified) People tought that the Tom Clancy book "Sum of All Fears" was completely fiction, the part about finding a long lost Israelis Nuclear Weapon (Tom Clancy was one of the few US Civilians that had a Lunch Room pass to the Cafeteria at CIA Headquarters).
(Unclassified) When I worked with Strategic and Tactical Nuclear Weapons (even used to teach Nuclear Physics before), and later worked as a Project Manager on a Nuclear Weapons/Chemical Weapons Security Project (near Billion USDs, many locations), we used the US Military Asymmetric Warfare Forces to attempt break ins. They would then recommend measures to defeat them after their attempts were successful. (ironic that I later became part of them (US Military Asymmetric Warfare Forces) after becoming Middle East Qualified and the INF (Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces) was eliminated).
(Unclassifed) Based on that, when I worked with Nuclear Weapons we also had contingency plans (actually practiced) to Emergency Destruct all the Nuclear Weapons to make them permanently unusable ((Unclassified) example: when the Turkish Military attempted to seize the nuclear weapons at a US Military Installation (Detachment) at Turkey during the Greek Turkish Cyprus Conflict, the US Military Detachment Commander, Redacted, and CWO Redacted, threatened to Emergency Destruct the Nuclear Weapons, eventually the Turkish Commander of the two Armor Battalions surrounding the US Miltary Detachment at Redacted backed down). (Unclassified) So in the case of the Pakistani Nuclear Weapons, instead of doing a "Snatch and Grab", it would be feasible to permanently disable them, as most nuclear materials are also pyrophoric (not the dictionary term, but, related to nuclear weapons materials, as once easily ignited will burn at high temperatures (similar to magneisum) and almost impossible to stop the burning of the materials until consumed. Later development of Depleted Uranium Projectiles). (Unclassified) In the implosion nuclear weapons the sphere is already covered in high explosive, that would require all the detonators to simultaneously detonate to collapse the sphere with equal pressure (think how many detonators needed for a sphere), so a thermite grenade or shaped charge would actually detonate the high explosives without a nuclear yield and destroy the Pakistanis nuclear weapon. (Unclassified) Other methods would have to be used to destroy the Pakistanis rapid assembly nuclear weapons, like ignition of the nuclear materials (maybe a thermite grenade, burn thru the metal shipping and storage container and ignite the nuclear materials.).
(Unclassfied) 2010, China allowed the North Koreans to ship Fundamentalist Islamic Iran, North Korean ICBMs thru Bejing China. (Unclassified) These are low orbit ICBMs, using Earth Rotation capable of hitting the US (East or West Coast), one was used to put a monkey into orbit by Fundmentalist Islamic Iran. Previously, the Fundamentalist Islamic Iranians developed their own three stage solid fuel (instant launch, no fueling prior to launch) ICBM, this is a near obital missile, possibly using Chinese GPS (stolen from US) Technology for the GNC (Guidance Navigation and Control), (Unclassified) most believe that this missile is an IRBM; however, considering the unclassified range of a Pershing II without a range limiter and a third stage this missile is actually a ICBM based on range, as tracked by Redacted during a Iranian Test Flight of 2011. (Unclassified) This is why the Russian Federation hastely deployed many S-400 Anti Ballistic Missiles Batteries at many of the previous USSR Nations that supply Oil to the now Russian Federation, regardless of the Russian Federation and Chinese providing Fundamentalist Islamic Iran with Weapons, Technology, Equipment, Advisors, Trainers, etc..
(Unclassified) Back in my days with the US Strategic and Tactical Nuclear Forces we actually had special nuclear weapons that were specifically to target the Ural Mountain Complex (harder to kill than what the Pakistanis might be storing their nuclear weapons in), these were low yield nuclear weapons designed to go thru the Ural Mountains, the reinforced by steel concrete then detonate inside the Ural Mountain Complex to collapse the Ural Mountain Complex. Under the INF Treaty, SALT, START, they were destroyed, including the designs and technology to manufacturer these nuclear weapons.
CBR (Chemical Biological Weapons) was the term used during the 1970s, as the order of highest threat to the lowest, as even a Colonel of the USSR Military could authorize the use of Chemical weapons (and did, during the USSR 40th Army Occupation of Afghanistan, 1979 to 1989, Agent Purple, Mustard Gas, poisoning water wells, etc. (I know I was with the US Military Training Teams from Germany to Pakistan/Afghanistan training the 1980s Pro US Afghan Muhajeen as well as being sent to US Ally Iraq during the Iran Iraq Wars. Iran an ally of the USSR since WWII.) I also previously was at a live agent Chemical Weapons storage site at Redacted.). During the 1980s to 1990s it was changed to NBC (Nuclear Biological Chemical), as the USSR started to deploy more nuclear weapons systems to eastern Europe. After President Clinton's State of the Union Address of 1998, it was changed to Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs)(which makes no sense, no indication of which is/are the highest threats.). Yes, I am that old (so are most of my men and women), I will be so glad that most of us can no longer be recalled again and again to Active Duty for "Matters of National Security", in two years, someone else will have to spend years of consecutive tours.
If anyone wants to watch an awesome no-nukes documentary (not no nuclear power), everyone should take a look at "Countdown to Zero." Great film.
On that point I'd like to point out how queer it is that Pakistan's leaders consider their nuclear weapons the pride of their country. Maybe if they focused less on making WMDs and more on building better infrastructre, a better economy, a higher standard of living for its citizens, and better medical care that it would have something better to be proud of. Dubai is considered the jewel of the Arab world, not because of the production of weapons, but because of its world class engineering marvels and because the standard of living in Dubai is the highest of any standard in the Arab world. They have something to be proud of. Not Pakistan.
Who is anti nuke? It is all posturing. Nukes are the best thing to happen to the planet. If only countries were not afraid to use them..specifically the USA.
@ ManFromNantucket
So true! It's that kind of attitude that shows why Pakistan is an "ally" that we should keep a careful eye on! No sane leadership should consider it a matter of national pride that they have the ability to take 10's of 1,000's of lives in a heartbeat and leave vast wastelands as a result.
Pakistan is a scared and angry child with a loaded and cocked uzi! They act in their most base and short-term best interests! God help us all if their government destabilizes and even one nuke goes loose.
I have a shred of hope that like Kazakhstan before it, if the Pakistani government starts to lose stability, that the presiding powers will be sensible and help remove the nuclear weapons quietly and peacefully the way it was handled by Clinton and Russia during the mid 1990's.
http://www.homelandsecuritynewswire.com/us-kazakhstan-complete-secret-transfer-soviet-era-nuclear-materials
Did Israel give the US permission $$$ to carry out this type of operation?
Or watch the Snuke episode of South Park. Very informative. I never even knew you could put a snuke in a snizz before that episode enlightened me.
show the bias people. of course pakistan is proud of their nukes. it gives them the ability to defend themselves against the indians who they consider their enemy. being able to defend your country should be a matter of pride.
one thing a blog like this shows is that we should not be proud of something in the US. how bigotted and arrogant we have become...
If there is a plan to do this there should be no discussion of this in the media. Doesn't matter if the talking heads drone on, but the government should not acknowledge any of this. Furthermore, why is it that the US has to always take the lead in the kind of operation? China and Russia are the other two big boys and they have as much to lose as we do, Russia has more Islamic attacks happening than we do in the US and it would be much easier to move a Pak Nuke to Russia or China than to here. There just have not been an attack in Russia as big as the one at the WTC. Also, China should be the country that deals with North Korean problems, they are the ones that helped this regime get to where it is and they should be the country that is held responsible for reigning that little tyrant in.
Anyone who seriously thinks that the US could locate and secure all of Pakistan's nuclear weapons in one coordinated operation is definitely deluded and has no place being part of US military planning. Even if we could reliably locate all of Pakistan's nukes, which is highly doubtful since we do not even know for sure how many they have, the odds on that many simultaneous raids all being successful is pretty much nil. To even attempt something like this would be completely foolhardy. The chaos that attempting something like this would likely create could result in one or more nukes falling into terrorist hands, which is the main thing we are trying to avoid. All the terrorists would need to do is wait for the US attack and use the resulting confusion to sneak one of the warheads out. The US would wind up being responsible for the exact scenario they say they are trying to prevent. The best way to ensure that Pakistan never uses one of their nukes is to make it clear that doing so would result in their entire country being turned into a nuclear wasteland. Making it clear that there is absolutely no upside to using these weapons is the best way to ensure they stay safely tucked in their bunkers. Despite the fact that I think there are elements within the Pakistani intelligence service (ISI) and military that support al Qaeda, I doubt even these elements would want the terrorists getting their hands on a nuke. The consequences are just too high for any sane individual to want this to happen. Even if there are one or two individuals that are crazy enough, I doubt there is sufficient support for this type of lunacy within the ISI or military to allow it to happen. Supporting the terrorists and wanting to see them succeed in their attacks against the US military in order to drive them out of the region is a far cry from wanting to see your country bombed into oblivion in retaliation for a nuclear bomb being used.
For the US government to openly discuss that these types of war game plans exist is completely inane. There is no benefit to discussing a potential operation that would never be attempted and would have virtually no chance of success. All it does is infuriate the Pakistanis and help bolster support for the terrorists within the Pakistani people. Discussing an operation like this does not serve any purpose and is certainly not a deterrent to the terrorists or any plans they might have to try and grab a nuke. The best thing for US officials to do if they are asked about plans like this is to simply reply 'no comment'.
If indeed this information was released intentionally by the US government,Im not going to second guess them. It may well be that this is all part of the diplomatic maneuvering between the US and Pakistan. On the other hand,if this was NOT intentional,the people who leaked it should be found and jailed. No,its not treason. Treason must be an OVERT act of aiding and abetting a enemy of the US that is WITNESSED by two people. I don't for a second believe that the present and former officials that leaked the information were did so in an attempt to aid Pakistan and if they leaked it illegally,then I doubt they did it in front of two witnesses.
Chances are however it was done intentionally. Chances are,if it was,then Pakistan probably assumed as much in intelligence and military circles and this was just a way to remind them and make sure the POLITICAL leadership was aware of it.
The only REAL risk of this information being out there is that they might take better care to hide them,but if they already assume we are going to try that in such an event,and are going to try to hide them better anyway,then its irrelevant.
Honestly,I have always assumed we have such plans in place. Yes,I agree with the poster who said its unlikely we could get them all. That may be true. Then again,who knows,maybe we have people in Pakistan in the know who can tell us this. Assume the Pakistanis have considered this as well,they are not stupid,well they are stupid,but they have people who are not unintelligent. Since all they do is suspect that we may have such plans,and they already knew what we announced,at least in intelligence and military circles,all we have done is said something they already knew. In fact,before the leak,they assumed that we might do something like that. After,they still assumed we might and the leak makes it no more or less certain if we have any realistic way to find them. All we have done is underscored that for any politicians who may not have been in the loop. At least thats what I think.
If Im wrong though,there should be hell to pay.
We can't trust a word of what that double talking, double dealing criminal Gen Mush says.
Pakistan is plunging fast into anarchy and chaos. It is better to take out the nukes before they fall into the hands of Islamic militants.
Are you saying you trust own double-dealing double-talking criminal politicians more than those of Pakistan?
I can't believe we're talking about stealing NUKES from another country!
How low-down and dirty have we gotten to even think along these lines? I thought I reached the point where nothing new could surprise me; one more time I am mistaken.
You people posting here who are ALL FOR IT ... think for one minute about your reaction - how you would feel, and then how you would react if another country had the brass balls to come here and to STEAL OUR OWN NUKES! Surely it's not difficult to make a case for the irresponsibility of a country that's involved in multiple wars ACROSS THE GLOBE!
How many countries are we at war with now? How many declared? How many undeclared? How many countries do we occupy? (That means our troops in their country). Too many to count? How many countries are now subjected to our DRONE ATTACKS? And all you guys say Pakistan is the irresponsible country?
Let's get back to imagining our "feelings" if a country came and stole our nukes. How long would it take before we annihilate them? How long for the retaliation? How many minutes of life can we expect to have left the minute some smart-ass country decides it's going to remove our NUKES because we are irresponsible?
What's wrong with you people. Have you all lost your minds?
jessix - no one would steal our nukes because we know how to protect them. pakistan is basically a corrupt, third world country that harbors terrorists. it's not safe for anyone for them to be nuclear. something does need to be done about it, and soon. it won't be long until these weapons do end up in the wrong hands.
if you think the US is so wrong in how our military operates to maintain our safety and freedom, then move somewhere else. having a base in a country is not occupying them. we are not at war with any country at the present time, however we are on "peacekeeping" missions in a number of them. why? because they pose a threat to the US. a threat to you and your ability to ramble on about how terrible this country is and how horrible we are in how we treat other countries. so if you don't approve, move. go to saudi arabia or iran and see how well you're treated there as a woman who speaks her mind. go to somalia and live in disease and poverty. be thankful that you can criticize our government and were given the education to do so.
Read post #1.30.
Your posts are why there should be US Mandatory Compulsory US Military Service (into the US Military Ground Combat Forces (US Army or USMC), not the USAF nor USN as indicated by President Obama's April 2009 US Defense Budget Cuts of the USAF and USN.), since 92% of US Citizens have NEVER Served in the US Military and only 1% are enduring the hardships of US Military Service that the other 92% refuse to do as a US Citizen Civic Duty. Then maybe all of you would be less likely to want to get the US Military involved in anything as it will also be your arse too, and not the other person.
EARN your Rights and Benefits of being a US Citizen. Candidate Obama, "US Citizenship is not an Entitlement", "US Military Service is a Civic Duty" during the 2008 Presidential Debates about reinstating the Selective Service.
So, Pakistan comes after Libya? Guess we don't have enough of wars, right Mr. Nobel Peace Prize?
Nobody bothers to mention North Korea. NK is the highest risk in the world insofar as nukes are concerned. The odds that NK would sell a nuclear weapon, and more importantly, teach the buyers how to hide, transport, and use the weapon, are so high that even China is terrified. China created this monster, and now, even China is subject to NK's blackmail. On top of that, China has to worry about NK completely failing, resulting in a flood of starving refugees across its borders, and a civil war in which the control and use of the nuclear arsenal would be the prize. If the leaders of NK thought they could sell a weapon along with the training without it being traced back to them, they would have already done so. Sooner or later, and most probably with China as the target, someone high enough in the NK government is going to decide he can do it, and there will be hell to pay. literally. Internal Chinese (actually, subject peoples in China) will be the most probable buyers. All China can do at this point is try to let NK collapse in such a manner as to be able to gain control of the country rapidly, so they can control the starving people, the insane military, and secure the nukes by moving them out of the country. NK's people are all literally insane, having been raised by the State and told what to think and do with every minute of their lives from cradle to grave. I saw this when Arabia tried to use NK construction workers. The best description I can use is ants. They were insane ants. And they murdered each other at such a high rate that Arabia cut them loose early, and never hired them again. So, do not forget Pakistan, but keep your eyes on the real ball: North Korea. the US should be doing war games WITH China for the scenereos I have described. They will occur!
We (USA) are conmsidering removing the weapons becasue they do not match our standards? How arrogant! We are the only nation to have ever used them on people. WE are the rouge state...WE are the world danger...I am SICK of this effing country!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
then leave.....go to Pakistan and live in a mud hut
Feel free to leave at any time. While you're on your way, please study spelling. I don't think a country can use "rouge".
Maybe you can use the "rouge" to put the red dot between your eyes. It'll make it a little easier for our snipers.
Then get the Eff out!
You're a flaming nut bag, you can leave any time you want to, and the sooner the better for the rest of us. Ohhhh, and take your computer with you, it doesn't know how to spell.
you are free to leave. freedom is never free and is paid for by people with the intestinal fortitude to do what is necessary. this country needs less of people of your type.
Wow, what a bunch of parrots.
We heard plenty of talk about it beforehand, but when America elected the black democrat, none of y'all left...what happened? Dish it out but you can't take it?
Why is it always one of two extremes with you people? The prospect of this scenario doesn't bother you? We can just decide to invade another country and go do this? Danm the consequences? Who buying this round? Taxed enough already right?
What a bunch of ninnies.
America is being a real dickk lately, and it's perfectly healthy if an American is getting sick of all the dickishness.
then get out if your tired of this country then move away, you make me sick
Please leave the country. And take your rouge mascara with you.
Interesting post 111pct. Usually nine out of ten Americans that threaten to leave over politics are lefties. Barbara Striesand has been threatening to leave for 20 years.
Proud, the USA is a country and not a state.
Aside from the vapid and inane rebuttals to the post of 'proud2bpeaceful, everyone is missing that this American is angry at what our government is/is not doing. I do not agree with certain insinuations the poster made about US as a country, but I can sense from the post what a lot of Americans are feeling today. WE have lost control of our republic and we are unable to do anything about it. There are few people in power deciding what course this country is taking, and from what has transpired during the last decade [terror on American soil, retirement accounts depleted because of Wall St. greed, wars without real approval, giving our tax monies to who knows who around the world... this list is ever longer]
I pray that better times are coming for US.
If it makes you that SICK... do everyonelse a favor and just leave!!!!!
He/she would have made a valid point without the capitalization and exclamation points(and maybe better spelling). It does seem very conceited, to me, to tell someone they're not doing their job to our standards so we're gonna do it for them, even if we have to use force.
Screw Pakistan. In no way are they our "allie". There's no way in hell Osama bin Laden is in your country, living that close to your "West Point", and you don't know about it. Tell em "Fine. We won't 'snatch and grab' your nukes. But, if we hear of someone stealing, commandeering, or someone just happens to 'lose' one..... We will make a parking lot out of your country before we let some terrorist blow up innocent people.".
Pirate C, "state" in international relations is commonly used to refer to a political being, i.e. a country.
Mmmmm, hate. I'd put money on 3.1-3.6 being right wing nutbags. But they are all correct... there are better countries to live in. I moved to a country where bickering is a thing of the past because ideology doesn't run government, level heads do. The rich pay more in taxes and are happy to do it and the blue collar middle class isn't brainwashed to argue on their behalf. Politicians here realize they are in office on behalf of the majority, not the ones who paid to put them in office or lobby for special interests.
Yes, get the eff out and watch with me while the "right" destroys what was once a great country.
You're welcome to leave at any time. There are plenty of foreigners who would love to take your place.
Now if only you'd leave our web sites and renounce your citizenship.
PLEASEEEEEE get your heads out from between your cheeks. We have no right to mess with anybodys nukes.
You flagg waving FAGGSSS, you go fight the freaking wars, Yeah go ahead try to take those NUKES.
Hey FAGGSS make sure you volunteer to be in with the first strike.
STUPIDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDdddd.
wlee - you seem to be missing the point of the "www" you type to get to this site... it isn't so easy to cut off common sense and you should be thankful.
Armando - you can have my spot
Are all of you the same people screaming you love paying (out of your tax money) for benefits to illegals? It is called freedom of speech. If you cannot voice your opinion in fear of being kicked out ...that gov style is called Communism. When the gove comes in YOUR house and takes YOUR stuff remember how cool it was for us to do it to Pakistan.
proud2bpeaceful - If you so sick of this country, then let me know where you'd like to relocate and I'll purchase a one-way, first class fare. You have absolutely no idea how hard people like me and those I work with strive every day to make sure this planet is a peaceful and safe place to live. Removing nukes from Pakistan would be a last resort, not a preemptive action. Unless you'd prefer after the fall of a nuclear capable country another rogue element come in and snatch up a nuke, having al-Qaida or another similar organization hold an active nuke would be infinitely more dangerous that the U.S. grabbing them for safe keeping. If you don't believe that, then I suggest your residence be ground-zero for the next attack (after we get your neighbors safely out first). Then we'll wait for your next post about how much you still think the U.S. is arrogant and a danger to the world.
maybe you and your family can head to pakistan for a nice family vacation, hope you get everything you deserve.
jbro, what commonsense are you referring to? What does WWW have to do with our sites, yes it's open to the world, but it's still intended for Americans. So tell us this great country you've adopted as your home.
those of you calling for other Americans you don't agree with,to "leave" or get out of the US..........
If they left and let immigrants take their place, you'd be the first ones screaming about how America is being "taken over" by other cultures and foreigners.
I laugh at the "love it or leave" parroting by the ignorant.
How about: If you see that our government/country needs improvement, get up off your azz and do something to change it for the better. Instead many of you use the ole "the US is still the best place to live" line. Many of you are too lazy or caught up in your own little lives, to try and do anything constructive to make the US a better place.
The USA is not perfect, nor are we the "best". That's only a line of BS arrogant people tell themselves, so they can feel superior to the rest of the world.
Now go ahead and try to start in on me with your BS.
As an American, I'm free to enter and leave the US as I please, and I do so many times a year.
I live outside the country 75% of the time(my wife and son don't live in the US.), and I find other countries to be more tranquil places to live in, than many places in the US.
American Lobo - Actually, I am one of those people that go to work every day with the singular thought of keeping both you and the entire planet safe. As to immigrants coming in, I'd welcome it as long as they come in legally...no problem there.
I have lived outside the country for many years. The one distinct difference between us and Europeans is as a general rule, Europeans can be much more arrogant and snobbish than any American. Not because they believe they are better than us Americans but because their country has been around for many hundreds, if not thousands of years longer than the U.S. and they feel we haven't earned the right to be as politically, economically nor militarily powerful as we are because our country is only a couple hundred years old. Another reason many Europeans feel such is because we don't do or follow the "European" way of doing things like health care or other social programs. I've lived in Greece, Italy, France, Spain and even the UK for a time. I wouldn't trade my permanent home in the U.S. for any of them.
Oh, I almost forgot...you spoke of immigrants and us in the U.S. being afraid of being taken over by other cultures. When I chose to live in Greece, I was expected to live by the standards and ways of Greece. I didn't bring my "american culture" over there with me. I didn't go looking for "english" TV or radio. I ate the local food, shopped at the local markets. Essentially, I immersed myself into the culture of the host country. I learned to speak their language, follow their customs and laws and "do as they did" at every opportunity. The reason why you hear Americans complain about those who come here to the U.S. is because many of the immigrants who choose to come here do not immerse themselves in the American culture but insist I become more tolerant of their culture instead. I guarantee you when in France or Spain and I call a local business, I dont' get "press number one for French or Spanish, number two for English" ...I get a human being on the phone that either speaks perfect French or is kind enough to help me learn my French a little bit better at their expense and patience. If we did that here in the U.S., the ACLU would go crazy.
Ah. Actually, it should be pointed out that the US is NOT the only nation to ever use a nuclear exposive. It is the only nation to use one an "Act of agression". I believe that some of those nine countries have used a nuke before. If fact, I believe that very fact that Pakistan likes to occassionly test their nukes near the boarder of India often makes people a bit worried.
Can you please name a country in the world where the rich and powerful do not have methods of getting out of their civic responsibilities? Which country is it that it is better to be an average citizen than it is to be the rich and powerful? Heck, even a communist state seems to produce 'the rich'.
proud2bpeaceful: Then please leave this country if you hate it so much. Good luck to you elsewhere. Please take your psychopathic hatred with you when you go though.
American Lobo: If someone proclaims that they hate America so much, like proud2bpeaceful did, why shouldn't somebody say "Then leave"? You're the hypocrite here. Sorry, but you really should change your nick. You obviously hate this country, you don't just "disagree" with it. Your words are insulting and hateful and yet you try to be the voice of reason?? LOL what a joke. Let us know when you get tired of spewing your own BS.
Bill C.: Agree with you wholeheartedly. I served overseas for several years and visited many countries in Europe and the Med. Like you, I tried to learn THEIR language. I obeyed THEIR customs and laws. I didn't automatically expect them to know mine.
People who whine about how bad America is conveniently forget a great many simple facts. They forget that other nations are just as bad, if not worse, than we are. Why? Because they are run by people. That poster who tried to claim that the country they moved to was so perfect is full of crap. There is no such thing as a "great" government.
There are only people, with all their flaws and faults. Welcome to humanity. Leave the labels at home and grow up.
Richard I don't recall anyone saying that the "rich do not have methods" but there is obviously less use of those "methods" in some other countries judgeing from the difference in income equality. Likewise I do not recall anyone stating "it is better to be an average citizen than it is to be the rich and powerful" but it is obviously better to be an average citizen in a country that invests more in social programs.
Your false arguments may persuade those who already agree with you, but it is obvious to the rest of us that some countries do a much better job than we do when it comes to looking out for the less advantaged. There are a plenty of sites to help clear it up for you if you are truly interested in knowing which countries are more equitable. If I were just an "average citizen" and felt there were no hope to restore the middle class in America then I would likely consider relocating to Sweden, Germany, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Italy, or Norway.
Curious how hard-right conservatives have "Legitimate Concerns" for the US when they complain during tough times, while liberals are thought of as "Whiners". Double standard, anyone? Newsflash, conservatives: You do NOT have the copyright on common sense, morality, hard work, patriotism, and anything else that's considered "decent" by your standards. You just THINK you all do.
SAGGG,
Both sides have a double standard, so save the indignant act. Liberals are just as bad as conservatives when it comes to stuff like that. Neither side has any room to talk.
Aren't all those countries either on the verge of bankruptcy or not producing enough new workers to sustain their welfare state in the future?
@proud2bpeaceful....get the f out if you don't like our country....
@Bill C...I agree i have lived outside the US when i was a kid growing up when my dad worked in the Embassy...I lived in Isreal and Pakistan (yep way different) and went to school with other international kids..I lived among the people of those 2 countries not on a base (because they didnt have any) ate the same food etc. As a kid we were told that we were Americans and had to uphold an image. We obeyed their laws and learned their language (in Isreal if you go to American international school at 5th grade you are required to learn Hebrew). So i learned the culture etc before going to pakistan we learned their culture and some of the language. we were respectful. IF you are foreign or immigrant maybe you should learn the culture and the LANGUAGE. English is the Universal language. As a grown up i have my own opinions because i lived there and i know what its like (especially pakistan)..I am just glad to be an American.
Publishing this article does nothing positive. It inflames our enemies and reinforces the Arrogance of the US around the world. Some things are better left unsaid and within the confines of very few minds. Tell me one good thing that can come from this article.
Pakistan was pissed before this article was published, and they would be pissed if it hadn't. Nothing has changed.
While dealing with the enemy, start the battles with propaganda war. That is what is being done.
Also articles like this raise awareness about the dangers of Paki nukes.
Listen, it would be a danger to our national security if Pakistan's nukes were to fall into the hands of , say, any Islamic terrorist or any terrorist group hostile to the US. OF COURSE we would have a plan to make sure that doesnt happen, or if it does, to either remove or destroy them. That is just common sense. If 911 proved anything, it was that we MUST keep an eye on any possibility.
Im no right wing wacko and know that bush lied us into the war with Iraq. I also believe we should begin withdrawing from Afghanistan too and eventually leave. But, having such a plan for Pakistan's nukes is just being prudent. We KNOW that there are groups out there that want to explode a nuke within the US!!
I'm just wondering if the leaders in Pakistan are reading this same article and have come to the conclusion that it would be better to use there nukes than to lose them?.............Since India has nukes I would imagine that Pakistan would be at a terrible disadvantage in any confrontation with India.............There backs are against the wall............It will be interesting to see what they will do...........Was it worth protecting Ben Laden?
Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) is the key to preventing nuclear war with anyone. The problem with nuclear weapons falling into the hands of Islamic Extremists is THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT MAD! They consider the US (and the western world) the Great Satan and see it as their divine duty to convert us or destroy us. Nothing in their belief system involve "live and let live".
So, for all you peace lovers out there who think the US shouldn't get involved in planning for this scenario, don't forget 9/11. The perpetrators of that attack had no qualms about strapping themselves into airplanes and crashing them into buildings. There was no hesitation on their part. If they could have put a nuclear warhead on one of those planes and detonated it on impact of the 2nd WTC Building, they would have, just so all the world could see the death of millions of American Infidels.
I have dealt with Islamic Extremists and know what I say to be the truth.
Todd-651965 Judging from other comments that you have made you don't seem too bright or knowledgeable, most likely infatuated with macho, bravado, military crap mixed with a dose of anti-Islam, disguised as counter-terrorism, nicely packaged as an opinionated armchair general.
Yep, you caught me romilio! I've never been to the middle east, dealt with Islamic Extremists, fought for my country, worn a uniform, worked as a military adviser, trained Afghan Army or Police, deployed anywhere, developed strategy, etc. As a matter of fact, I haven't been doing any of that for the past 23 years. Just sitting here on Fort Benning polishing up my armchair.....
How about you?
Todd, you have to forgive Romilio he broke a nail while doing the laundry.
Agree wlee. romilio has to live in a pineapple under the sea or some crap.
Yeah Todd, Just sucking up the tax payers money aren't you. You are a depletion of our already burdened system. Go get a real JOB in the real world...
Romilio,
Way to just put all that hate and ignorance on display for everyone to see. You can't intelligently argue any of Todd's points, so you resort to insults and stupidity. Great job. Must be nice to act so insulting sitting there safely behind a keyboard. You'd never have the brass to say something like that to someone in the military directly to their face.
People like you always make me worry for the future of the human race.
Are u guys trying to make Todd look like a hero? OMG, what are we coming to?
tex2c,
Maybe some of us just don't like snide, insulting jerkoffs like romilio. You wouldn't happen to be defending HIS comment now would you?
OMG what are we coming to???
Whoa Maggie, perhaps you don't recognize Todd's "Ft. Benning armchair polishing" comment for the sarcasm that it is! (btw careful with sarcasm on Newsvine posts Todd, it easily gets past some readers).
Actually, his comment combined with his earlier post makes one believe that Todd has been serving his country as an Army Ranger (with the 75th?), has been on multiple tours overseas including as a military trainer, which makes him likely a NCO (Gunny?) and that is a real job in the real world - in fact, I doubt it gets any more 'real' than that...as in, the-real deal, up-close-and-personal, in-your-face reality.
...part of that 'realness' qualifies the man to speak from direct experience. Can you say the same, romilio - from your direct experience including contact with Islamist radicals, Pakistani military involved with this topic here, and living overseas in the Theater of Operations? From the tone of your rather insulting reply to him, I frankly doubt it.
OK, this is my opinion: as US citizens, no matter what your personal background, political beliefs, party affiliations, economic status, etc., we all owe Todd and his fellow servicemen respect for the very real job they do on our behalf. It's difficult, dangerous, dirty, demanding...and (far too) often unappreciated or rewarded. Just ask any veteran's family.
It's vital to keep in mind that regardless of debate on how we got into our situation in the world (economically, politically), the fact remains we are in this reality now. That means we need Todd and the Armed Forces. And they deserve respect, support, and understanding, period. And part of that respect means giving respect for their opinions and speech (which are hardly monolithic, btw). You don't have to agree with it, but they are due the same respect (at least!) that you expect for yourself (that you might not actually receive) but this is part of a civilized society and discussion.
Remember, the Armed Forces don't order themselves to aggression or (with extremely rare exceptions) into foreign involvement. No their Bosses order them into action. And those Bosses are elected...to both sides of the aisle in Washington.
So I say this to you collectively, Newsvine posters: Give our past and active veterans respect and some room for their voiced opinion. They are entitled to theirs at much as most here and more than some are; many veterans are dealing with the consequences of past and present harsh realities and if that gives their posts and opinions a volatile edge, then you can take an enlightened road and try to understand that. Or, you can react with insults, taunts, or ignorant responses and show your own bias and lack of maturity, understanding and compassion.
To be fair, it goes the other way, too - Veterans need to remember that the majority of the US population has not experience many of the same realities and hardships you have; that does not mean the civilians are due less respect for their opinions, whether agreed upon or not. You too can take an enlightened path and get past insults and ignorance, and make a sincere attempt to focus on the common ground, the true priorities, and the solutions that must be found. We need each other more than ever if we're gonna prosper - and don't let anyone make you believe otherwise!
The real key here is to hold the elected representatives accountable - that responsibility goes with the territory as a citizen, and the accountability goes with the territory for our elected officials. \
So make them explain why they do what they do!
And stand up and admit error when it is or was wrong!
And state what they will do or how they are going to do it better in the future!
And then, watch them like hungry raptors...
OMG that was a long-winded post. But I wanted to thank Todd for his service, then I hadda get the rest of that out there. thx!
Woot Woot... well said. Respect.
Go ahead,
Keep on being long winded. Excellent posts like yours are worth reading.
I agree with Idaho. I kinda wish that Government service was a requirement for full citizenship (we keep most of the rights but the right to mess with any political system needs to be borne by people who truly understand the cost of not doing so.)
Go Ahead and Deny it...,
If he is with the Ranger Battalions (Operational, not support) he would have to be a minimum of a E-5 to have been an Advisor more than likely a E-6, if he were US Military Asymmetric Warfare doing FID, he would be a minimum of a E-6 (light and heavy weapons qualified, and language qualified) more than likely an E-7. If he was like us previously, US Military Training Teams from Germany to US Ally Iraq during the Iran Iraq Wars, he more than likely would be a US Military Officer or Warrant Officer, same as when we were rotated to Pakistan/Afghanistan to train the 1980s Pro US Afghan Muhajeen (NOT the 1990s Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban (the Pro USSR Afghans that fled to Fundamentalist Islamic Iran during the USSR 40th Army Occupation, since the USSR did not care which Afghans they massacred, and Definitely not Osama Bin Laden as he was at Saudi Arabia living with his rich parents and starting to plan the 1993 First World Trade Center Bombings to gain international recognition for Al Quada, it was SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) for us to fingerprint, take photos, document everyone that we trained, as possible future Intelligence Assets). After the US Cut and Ran (we were ordered out), the 1990s Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban massacred all the US Ally 1980s Pro US Afghan Muhajeen (including their families, friends, relatives, in laws, etc. to prevent future revenge killings) as Collaborators to the Christians, Jews, Unbelievers. Just after the 9/11 2001 Attacks we were deployed to Afghanistan to disrupt the Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban Government, and then as well as later could not find any of the 1980s Pro US Afghan Muhajeen that we trained (in 2009 we were shown the shallow mass graves of the friends and allies we made in combat.). This is the reason that the Afghans do not trust the US, as they believe that the US will Cut and Run again (abandon US Allies to get massacred again as a repeat of History (repeat mistakes and expect different results.).
Just as a comment, to those that say "Mud Huts", "Caves". The "Mud Huts" have very thick walls, as Afghan "Green Tech", remain cool during the +100 degree summers, and require minimal heating during the harsh near arctic winters. Most of the "Caves" are NOT "Caves" they are the mines, tunnels, mine shafts, etc. left over from when they traded with the Egyptian Empire (B.C.); the Afghans occupied these mines, tunnels, during the USSR 40th Army Total Conventional Warfare (Carpet Bombing, massacres of entire villages, millions of area denial weapons (landmines), Chemical Warfare, etc.) as bomb shelters, many did not rebuild their villages, as the water wells were poisoned by the USSR after their villages were destroyed and most of the villagers were massacred. These mines, mineshafts, tunnels remain cool during the summers, and also require minimal heating during the winters, they also have large clean water pools (filtered thru the mountains), also Afghan "Green Tech". After living with them (not on a secure FOB, COB, Air Base, Green Zone, etc.) for years of consecutive tours (to gain their trust, a Tactical and Strategic Goal of US Military Asymmetric Mountain Warfare) you tend to notice things here (Afghanistan). By the way that was not one of my (support) helicopters that crashed (Taliban claimed that they shot it down).
Then get the eff out!
Maybe USA just wants to release such stories so pakistan will move/secure their nuclear weapons better. Unusual activity in pakistan can help locate where they might be hiding the nuclear weapons for future grab and run.
You don't think we already know where they are? Hell, I put special circuits in them just so I can disarm or detonate them with my iPhone from right here in the USA!
Just like we knew where all the WMDs were in Iraq? Get real.
The Iraqi WMDs were moved. Bush knew they were there..... He had the receipts.....
Go read President Clinton's 1998 State of the Union Address, and especially his H.R.4655, that is where the Congressionally Approved Intelligence came from that resulted in the US Senate passing the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution AFTER all the means of H.R. 4655 to Overthrow President Saddam Hussein failed (US Military Force as the last option).
I know because we were involved in most of that sh!t. Just after the ink dried on the US Senate 2002 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution we were sent to live with the Kurdistanis, to gain their trust, organize them, train them to fight the Iraqis so that the Iraqis Military Command would believe that the Main US Military Conventional Warfare Forces would come thru US Ally Turkey so that the Iraqis Military Command would deploy their main Military Forces north of Baghdad, then the USAF dropped non nuclear E-Bombs to destroy all Iraqis Electronics (especially their Military Communications, so that they could not redeploy their forces). All this worked.
add to post#11.4.
All this worked. So prior to the 2003 US Military Liberation of Iraq, we (two companies of US Military Asymmetric Warfare and a few companies of Kurdistanis) destroyed 6 Full Stength Armor and Mechanized Iraqis Divisions (documented History), and the 2 Full Stength Armor and Mechanized Iraqis Divisions that were held in Reserve (not in the History Books).
The Iraqis Military being Command Driven (you do nothing until ordered to) after they lost communications, surrendered or could not form a cohesive defense or redeploy their main forces to the south. As to why the US Military Conventional Warfare Forces from Kuwait and Saudi Arabia basically were unopposed during the 2003 US Military Liberation of Iraq.
The Intelligence used by President Clinton was an outright "Error of Ommission" (lawyer speak for a lie):
1. The use of Chemical Weapons was used just like the US use of Nuclear Weapons against Japan to save lives on both sides so that the US Military would not have to invade Japan (estimated over a Million US Military would be killed, estimated if the Japanese fought to the last, millions killed), during the Iran Iraq Wars.
2. The Kurdistanis were the Armed (men, women, children) Allies of Fundamentalist Islamic Iran during the Iran Iraq Wars.
3. The Shiites to the south were those that fled from Iran's massive unemployment as Illegal Aliens after the Fall of the Shah of Iran. To this day they are still loyal citizens of Iran. How Fundamentalist Islamic Iran gained control of the Southern Iraqis Oil Fields giving the Contracts to Iran's Ally the Chinese and Russian Federation.
Didn't Pakistan get them from us in the first place?
No they came from China, not the US.
But didn't Pakistan use the US Aid money to buy them from China? Of course, we borrowed the money from China originally. So really, shouldn't we just destroy the nukes and tell China we already paid them back?
lynseypug, you are a genius!, lol
lol I agree Genius...
Although a gentleman stated that the page is for the local community (I stumbled upon the page while searching for something and Pak Nukes bother my country the most), I couldn't resist to point that if the following information is to be believed, Gunman is right.
Search Richard Barlow on Wiki
Or
'The man who knew too much' on Guardian
If radical Islamics ever took control of Pakistan, it would be mandatory for the west to pursue a joint Cold War policy of containment against Pakistan, in order to bring it economically to its knees. It might at some point be (reasonably) safe to do a "snatch and grab", but only once the government of Pakistan had been effectively decapitated. - RC
Not 'if' but 'when'. It is inevitable that radical islamists will take over large swaths of pakistan. Their government or army is incapable of controlling the factions.
(I suggest we get busy producing the exotic weapons needed for this kind of extreme operation.) - RC
I don't think the gov't wants to "control" any "factions". There's no money in it.
I hope that was sarcasm Jeremy with a J
What do you think ISI is? A radical group who happens to run and deal with the military....
Not sure what idiots preparred, researched and edited this article but they are morons. One, Pakistan does not have "nukes". They have atomic bombs like we dropped on Hiroshima and no way of delivering them outside their own borders. You can't stick those on their little missiles. You need a massive plane to even lift one and we would shoot them down in an instant. They are easier for us to just blow up on the ground, where they would act as dirty bombs, not as a-bombs, if not carefully set off just right.
sorry but you are the idiot. they have mid range ICBMS. They have the capability to target american bases in the middle east. If we do not get the communist out of the whitehouse and eliminate the North Korean/middle east connection they will soon have the capability to strike the homeland.
Everyone should just chill. It wouldn't surprise me if we had plans to take the nukes from the French, Indians and anyone else that might have them.
We are a paranoid country that always sees the worst possibilities and make outlandish plans to try and prevent them. Extremely few of these plans are ever put into action.
Heck, out military has plans drawn up on how to respond if Mexico should decide to invade. I'm not sure sure if we have similar military strategies worked out against Canada or not. Those Canucks are crafty.
"... if Mexico should decide to invade." I don't know where you live, but it is obvious that THEY ALREADY HAVE INVADED US with millions of their citizens and are destroying our way of life to their own advantage. GET REAL!!!
Let's see now if I have this right. We are just going to go into a soverign nation and "take" their nuclear weapons. Obviously this is a slow day in the ole newsrooms. No "real" news.
We did it with one of their honored guest.
I wonder how long until @!$%# actually hits the fan. We need a plan like this to at least limit destruction.
The author of this article does a poor job in backing up his alarmist and sensationalist headline. Of course the US military has written some back-up plan somewhere re: Pakistan's nukes, but the US military also has back up plans for what happens if California falls into the Pacific or if Texas tries to secede.
There is no remote indication that any of these plans are on the table; if so, the author should have led with these credible remarks in the introduction. The report is padded with speculation and lacks and a sincere analysis of the how difficult a "snatch and grab" operation would be. It would still be unbelievable on a movie-set with cast of James Bond, Jason Bourne, and the Deltas.
US is worried that Pakistani nukes will fall into the "WRONG" hands? !!!!
Duh! Pakistan is the "WRONG" hands.
LOL Amen PJ
Iran.
That people in the intelligence community are stupid enough to admit to the press that this kind of planning is going on is catastrophic stupidity!! Of course these kind of plans are in existence, as are tons of other scenario plans like all out confrontation with China and Russia...but there is no need for the press to even bring this @!$%# up....all it does is serve the alarmist elements in both countries and raises the odds that something this extreme will be necessary....what a bunch of idiots!!
Mad Mikey, it's called "miss-direction". General Eisenhower did it to the Germans @ Normandy. General Schwartzcoff did it to Iraq in Desert Storm.
In both cases, the enemy thought we were gonna do something (invade) in a specific area, so we gave them every reason to believe they were correct. So they concentrated their defenses in those areas, with total confidence, thinking we were playing into their hand, and would get whupped!
We went the OTHER WAY. The Enemy could not respond in time - got beat down, badly! Get it? But this is just one of our tricks.
They thought exactly what you are saying: What fool would........
I think we need to pack up (missiles and all) and come home. And above all stop sending those maggots money. If the US lets them keep the weapons, they will wind up in the control of the Taliban and/or al-queerdos.
gunmanI agree and to snatch the nukes would be the best way to go. American money has been used to fund terrorism. Dry up that money Boycott all Pakistani products and let them implode on their own totalitarian religion.
It is a foregone conclusion to me that one day someone steals one or a few of Pakistan's nukes and explodes it or someone inside the Pakistani army does it in a tense moment plunging the world into chaos. We need to be prepared for this inevitable contingency.
Forget that, what about the DPRK just selling a nuke to a group that can come up with the cash? They already trade with Iran selling nuke technology.
It's a scary thought, but I see in the future a major American city waking up to a mushroom cloud from one of these terrorist groups. We need to control/limit proliferation, but everyone's gotta be so PC these days, we can't just do things by force.
It's time to stop "playing ball" with these rogue regimes, and start showing them we mean business.
u.s has spent billions of dollars to fight terrorists in pakistan, afganistan and to bring economic prosperity and social progress in these countries. unless pakistan nukes are kept under control, all of u.s money spent in pakistan will go in vain. so u.s needs to gain control of pak nukes to protect u.s interest in the region and beyond this region. india will likely get involved in this, but it will be good for pakistan and india because of limited destruction of both these countries, otherwise there will be substantial destruction of the subcontinent having most of it in pakistan and pakistan's sovereignity, which is an artficial creation by unwise leaders of both india and pakistan.
It is very tempting to add my two cents but unfortunately I would only be two cents broker when I'm finished.
When there is news articles about Pukistan. I see red. I despise them with a burning attitude.
thats because most of those pakis are smarter than you..........
your name should be maggot not maggie.
The Paki's have nukes that in the hands of Islamic radicals, could cause a lot of problems in their region. Look at it this way: If you knew that the crazy guy down the street had enough weapons to be a threat to the neighborhood, you would want to keep an eye on him. If he came out of his house making threats, I'm sure you would call the police so that they could come and take his weapons away. Same senario with pakistan and the US being the cops.
First of all, Pakistani army is one of the best trained army in the world. The have been winning worlds toughest infantry topgun competition in england for the last 3 years, check out chamberlain, where roughly top 16 armies of the world participate.
\10\21\story_21-10-2010_pg7_18
It will be a diasterous attempt to try to snatch nukes from Pakistan. we need to understand that China is prioviding pakistan with submarines with cruise missiles which can travel upto 1800miles. they are nuclear tipped cruise missiles. Any attempt to get the nukes will surely trigger these subs to launch nuclear weapons against us.
We need to accept the reality that Pakistani nukes are here to stay and we need to forge good relationships in that region. The biggest threat will be Pakistani govt reading all this and start distributing their tech to iran and rest of middle east.
Tom they've already done that, where have you been
well alot of people have displayed their opinions. here's mine. im a american civilian, and my main objective in life is to make my loved one as happy as they can possibly be. i love my kids, my wife , my mother, and all my siblings and their offspring.in saing that here it is . to the nation's leaders who are more determined to see who has a bigger cock, make or buy an island, put all government officials that think they have the balls to hold the weight of the entire world on their shoulders there and give them guns.plain and simple. i dont like war so why do so many civilians (from any country), have to deal with the bull@!$%#. i dont walk around looking for a fight. thats not my style. granted we was bombed, and granted we got the guy who did it. why cant we have a time of peace without having to worry if this person is going to shoot a nuke up another's ass. i dont know about alot of you people, nuti was raised to respect others and to treat them in such a manor that you would like to be treated.its a bunch of bull@!$%# to sit here and have to read that the world is going to end because of nuclear war. give someone who has everyday troubles take the reigns.if i had control i would irradicate an and all nuclear weapons and be more worried about improving government relations. the fact of the matter is noone, no country, and government should say anything about another. we all have faults. some more than others, instead of flipping someone off try shaking their hand first. and another fact for the brain is that IF and thats a if, there is to be nuclear war, all the heads of the government that are running their mouths and trying to see who has the bigger dick, is going to safe in their quiet little nuclear-proof bunkers. who is going to pay for in the end. we are! thats right, the civilians. my son, my daughter, my wife, my grandchildren, your grandchildren, your grandchildren's grandchildren.is that what anyone wants to see. i know i dont want to see it. i rather see people getting along. instead of fighting all the time why dont we all just sit back and watch a sunrise on the horizon.but no simple pleasures in life(like inviting loved ones and friends over to have a bbq) is just too much to ask.and i also understand that people may not agree with what i got to say.thats fine and if you want to comment, then please do. im not trying to offend anyone im just saying that we all just need to learn to get along and have a time of prosperity instead of worrying if pakistan, iran, iraq, india, or the united states is going to start firing nukes.i also want to be the first to apologise because im not perfect by no means.i just want to go to bed at night and not have to worry about waking up in the morning with a leg growing out of my forehead. PEACE!!!!!!