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.

 

Special forces on standby over nuclear threat (Pakistan)

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 02:43 AM
link   
PAK have plutonium weapons:


According to public statements made by US officials, this unsafeguarded heavy water reactor generates an estimated 8-10 kilotons of weapons grade plutonium per year, which is enough for one to two nuclear weapons. The reactor could also produce tritium if it were loaded with lithium-6. According to J. Cirincione of Carnegie, Khusab's plutonium production capacity could allow Pakistan to develop lighter nuclear warheads that would be easier to deliver with a ballistic missile.


www.fas.org...

fas so slightly biased


thats since 1998 - plutonium cannot be used in a `implosion` type gun barrel type - so ergo they are prducing `better` weapons.

whats interesting , especially with all this `hubub` about iran building a reactor :



India has not signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) or the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). India is a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and four of its 13 nuclear reactors are subject to IAEA safeguards.


which means that 9 reactors are not subject to inspections.....

so all this about iran? pot , kettle , black.




posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 04:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin


India has not signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) or the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). India is a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and four of its 13 nuclear reactors are subject to IAEA safeguards.

which means that 9 reactors are not subject to inspections.....
so all this about iran? pot , kettle , black.


OK. Now let's see what we've got where the US is concerned.

Under the U.S.-IAEA Safeguards Agreement, the United States provides the IAEA with a list of facilities eligible for IAEA safeguards. The list excludes those facilities with direct national security significance.

So, how many US facilities are not under IAEA safeguards? I can assure you that there are many more than I can count on my fingers!! Many more!!

So what's this pot, kettle, black??
To the US of A, I would sing, "Papa don't preach!!" (Madonna)


Cheers!



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 04:53 AM
link   
aye there going nuts over 1 reactor when i reality the entire IAEA inspections are pointless as the `signatories` ignore it mostly anyway;

`hey we got 32 reactors but you can visit these 5`.

waste of time.



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 05:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Harlequin
 


well they are reported to have a plutonium producing capability.
Whether they can build the associated bomb technology, well thats another story..
I'm trying to find more recent links to that effect..



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 06:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin
aye there going nuts over 1 reactor when i reality the entire IAEA inspections are pointless as the `signatories` ignore it mostly anyway;

`hey we got 32 reactors but you can visit these 5`.

waste of time.


Well the excuse here is India has a more noble non-proliferatory record than Iran. In fact , with the exclusion of the use of the Cirrus Reactor(offered by Canada) for military related nuclear testing,there has been no other foreign source of nuclear know-how for India.. atleast to my knowledge.

So the deal is that even though India doesn't agree with the biased clauses of the NPT(and thats why it hasn't signed on), it supposedly follows the essence of non-proliferation: not selling or acquiring nuclear tech for military purposes.

Again I'm looking for online sources that state otherwise..



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 09:41 AM
link   
Indian prime minister is now going on a 3 day state visit to China in under 2 weeks. The timing just catches the eye, don't you think? Here is the related thread:

ATS Alternative news thread



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 04:07 PM
link   
Here is some relevant info. Who engineered Bhutto's killing?--MUST READ posted on another thread.



posted on Jan, 7 2008 @ 12:21 PM
link   
I've just learned an interesting little nugget. Pakistan represents Iranian interest in the U.S. since Iran and the U.S. have no official diplomatic ties.

I found this in the article Iranian boats 'harass' U.S. Navy, officials say which was originall posted on this linked thread



posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 03:20 PM
link   
LMAO what a load of conspiracy theory rubbish. Yeah, Pakistan is just going to sit by and hand over the nukes to the US special forces or some alien force… Well, got bad news for some of you wet dreamers. These nukes are here to stay till the end of times.


[edit on 3-4-2008 by hitman666]

[edit on 3-4-2008 by hitman666]



posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by hitman666
 


Would you care to elaborate for us then? Am I to understand that you are in Pakistan? I ask this because of your use of the word "here" instead of "there." I would certainly be interested to know the facts which support your opinion.



posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


No, I'm not in that country. All I'm trying to clarify is that one has to realize the painstaking s h i t Pakistan has had to go through in order to build the nukes. The amount of blackmail and threats it's even taking now for possessing these weapons. It would be highly naïve to even think that these nukes will be snatched with the help of any special force. If that was an option it would’ve happened long ago. Especially, after 9/11 when the US had the opportunity of having a go at Pakistan. It didn't happen because the US establishment is fully aware that it would be suicide to even take a step in that direction. Just think of these nukes as Pakistan's jugular vein. People have a perception that Pakistan is some banana republic that can be compared to Afghanistan or Iraq. These people are sorely mistaken.

[edit on 4-4-2008 by hitman666]



posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by hitman666
 



Just think of these nukes as Pakistan's jugular vein.


This particular phrase I will not dispute.

Obviously the situtation has changed some, for the time being, but I still stand behind my general premise that Pakistani nukes are a "loose-cannon" that the US certainly mustr figure into their strategy. Also keep in mind that the US is the master of the false-flag attack, and could manipulate the deployment of Pakistani nukes in accordance with their will, as opposed to taking direct action to control them. But if it really came down to it, I have no doubt that the US could in fact seize those weapons if so desired.

By the way, I meant no offence in regards to your location. I was honestly hoping for an "insiders" perspective.



posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


Well, that remains to be seen. I'm sure the US is working on some sort of a contingency plan as they’ve stated before. However, I think this will all be based on highly speculative intel. Even Pakistan’s scientists aren’t aware of the exact location of the nukes. In reality we know that when a country is able to produce its nukes in secrecy, it’s also able to scatter and hide them in that manner. Even US satellites are unable to detect the nukes. I highly doubt that the US would be able to confiscate all of the weapons. Maybe bomb a few speculative storage facilities, but that’s just about it. There's no way the US can snatch all of the nukes. Too many nukes scattered at too many unknown places. Such a move could in fact be the trigger...

No probs. That's exactly why I've removed my inappropriate comment about the location.


[edit on 4-4-2008 by hitman666]



posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by hitman666
 


I think the thing that concerns me most is the ties between Pakistani and US intelligence, that has become all to clear since 9/11. And given the political instability in Pakistan, the land is ripe for exploitation by these clandestine factions.



posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


I seriously doubt that. Pakistan's nukes are perfectly safe. In fact, they’re as safe as any other country that possesses nukes. Also the people in control are in no way politically or religiously motivated. There's a whole rigorous procedure in order to select the people involved. A bunch of Torah Borah loonies don’t have the ability to operate the nukes. Moreover, there’s an entire complex command and control structure behind the scenes. This command and control structure is based on the US model as well as setup with US help.

I beg to differ. Could you define instability so that I can shed more light on that? Political insecurity doesn’t influence the nuclear issue in anyway. These are two separate issues.

[edit on 4-4-2008 by hitman666]



posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by hitman666
 


To this...



Could you define instability so that I can shed more light on that?


I reply with your own words...



This command and control structure is based on the US model as well as setup with US help.



posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
Obviously the situtation has changed some, for the time being, but I still stand behind my general premise that Pakistani nukes are a "loose-cannon" that the US certainly mustr figure into their strategy. Also keep in mind that the US is the master of the false-flag attack, and could manipulate the deployment of Pakistani nukes in accordance with their will, as opposed to taking direct action to control them. But if it really came down to it, I have no doubt that the US could in fact seize those weapons if so desired.


I can't help but think the US is using this build up some false-flag situation. Using the 'unsecured nukes' card elevated by mentioning the need to possibly save then from the bad guys. Possibly the current world intel gives the Pakistan nukes the greatest chance for use by terrorists so an opportunity is being manufactured. Whose word can a person really trust any more?



posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 04:39 PM
link   
The Pakistani nukes will only disappear if India gets rid of them as well. In fact, Pakistan has acknowledged in the past that it's willing to dismantle the lot if India does too. The dilemma with India is that they will never get rid of their stockpile. China is one reason and another is their vision of becoming a superpower.

Deep inside I hope that someday this region gets rid of these nasty weapons. They don't serve any good.

[edit on 4-4-2008 by hitman666]



posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 12:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by hitman666
The Pakistani nukes will only disappear if India gets rid of them as well. In fact, Pakistan has acknowledged in the past that it's willing to dismantle the lot if India does too.
Deep inside I hope that someday this region gets rid of these nasty weapons.


Nope! That's not going to happen in a hurry. These weapons are here to stay.

Pakistan will not dismantle till India does...
India will not till China does...
China will not till US of A and Russia does...
US of A will not till Russia and China does...
Russia will not till US of A and China does...

And on and on. It's a vicious circle. Until all nuclear weapon states embark on simultaneous and verifiable dismantling of ALL nuclear weapons assets, we would have to live with Damocles sword hanging over our heads till kingdom come.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 05:05 PM
link   
At this point, I say we'll be invading Pakistan by this time next year.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join