It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. Secretly Aids Pakistan in Guarding Nuclear Arms

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 05:06 PM
link   

U.S. Secretly Aids Pakistan in Guarding Nuclear Arms


www.nytimes.com

Over the past six years, the Bush administration has spent almost $100 million so far on a highly classified program to help Gen. Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan’s president, secure his country’s nuclear weapons, according to current and former senior administration officials.

But with the future of that country’s leadership in doubt, debate is intensifying about whether Washington has done enough to help protect the warheads and laboratories....
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 05:06 PM
link   
On the one hand, I am glad that we're protecting a potentially volatile cache of nuclear weapons. On the other hand, there is just something about this arrangement that I don't like.

Oh, and there's that whole "Why are you printing a secret that anyone with a brain larger than a water chestnut could figure out?" thing that leaves me a bit unsettled, too.

www.nytimes.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 07:43 PM
link   
Considering the fact that the U.S. isn't as good at securing it's own nuclear warheads (see "the Barksdale incident), I'm not overly re-assured that the U.S. gov't will be able to secure Pakistan's nuclear arsenal either.

Especially if civil war breaks out as result of "Perverts" Mushariff's fake emergency rule.


On the "Other" hand, Pakistan's tenuously guarded nukes Might be an ideal source for an "Islamo-facist" terror device to be procurred by a corrupt Administration on its last legs, and detonated at a convenient future target.

All in the name of "Democracy-building" or course!



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 09:20 PM
link   
Old news. We ahve been assisting Pakistan in securing their nukes not long afatre the Afghanistan invasion. Their country and leadershipn is not as sec ure as we would like and with the possibility of a coup of some sort, then outside help had to be attained to help secure their weapons.

Yes we need to secure ours as well, but suffice to say it a little more critical to make sure theirs are extremely secure given the environment in which they live if you know what i mean.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 03:09 AM
link   
even more troubling is that some of the funding we give to pakistan gets funneled to the taliban by way of the ISI, in essence we are funding a war against ourselves.
also, bush and condi are urging musharraf to hold elections, how do they know that after the current actions of musharraf declaring martial law that a terrorist group wont be elected? kinda like in palestine.

IMO pakistan is far more dangerous to america than iran



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 03:17 AM
link   
Hey what are you complaining about? It's better than how the British keeps their nukes secure:

British nukes were protected by bike locks




posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 09:05 AM
link   
I doubt they were stored outside on a bike rack being locked with a bike lock. I imagine the facility they were being stored in was highly secure itself.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join