Saudi nuclear weapons 'on order' from Pakistan

page: 1
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Anyone see this article on the BBC?
www.bbc.co.uk...

Saudi Arabia has invested in Pakistani nuclear weapons projects, and believes it could obtain atomic bombs at will, a variety of sources have told BBC Newsnight.

While the kingdom's quest has often been set in the context of countering Iran's atomic programme, it is now possible that the Saudis might be able to deploy such devices more quickly than the Islamic republic.

Earlier this year, a senior Nato decision maker told me that he had seen intelligence reporting that nuclear weapons made in Pakistan on behalf of Saudi Arabia are now sitting ready for delivery.


Basically, they helped pay for Pakistans nuclear progam, and have an understanding with them to acquire nuclear weapons should they need them. They also already have the means to deploy them, having acquired Chinese missiles 25 years ago, as well as the possibility of Pakistani delivery systems. Also speculates that they could step in and take the place of the World Bank in providing loans to Pakistan, if the World Bank withdrew funding because of Pakistan supplying nuclear weapons.




posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 01:51 PM
link   
We've all been told that when Iran gets the bomb the Middle Eastern arms race begins. The Pakistanis will happily sell to whomever has the cash.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 01:53 PM
link   
unlike other weapons of war that we all ship back and forth to each other at sale...

a nuclear weapon being used on someone "as needed", that was just outright sold or given from a 3rd party nation, seems to hold just as much responsibility.
i mean all other wmd holding nations wont ignore that fact, the origin-nation of that weapon will be held accountable.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by MortlitantiFMMJ
 


I was wondering how long, if ever, it would take for this to break public and become known.

I'm glad some of the cards are finally...FINALLY...being put on the table for all to see. It's about damned time.

Now people can look at this and have a far better idea of what the stakes actually are, and how deadly serious this game really is. It's never JUST been about Iran getting a weapon.

...now if they'd tell the rest, we could actually make informed decisions about which side to take on this. I made that choice a long time ago, myself ...and Saudi Arabia is absolutely not it.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


There's about no one in the Middle East I want on my side ... well, maybe the Kurds. They've been kicked around enough they might turn out civilized if left alone.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by MortlitantiFMMJ
 


Thank god no terrorist ever hailed from the house of Saud. Is hate to imagine a nuke fall into a terrorists hand.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by MortlitantiFMMJ
 


Think about what absolute whores they are spiritually. Sunnis working with Shiites to nuke other Shiites. Sunnis working with Jews to wipe out Shiites and Alawites.

Each claiming moral superiority.

There isn't even a "cleanest dirty shirt" in that bunch.




posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 03:02 PM
link   

InverseLookingGlass
reply to post by MortlitantiFMMJ
 


Think about what absolute whores they are spiritually. Sunnis working with Shiites to nuke other Shiites. Sunnis working with Jews to wipe out Shiites and Alawites.

Each claiming moral superiority.

There isn't even a "cleanest dirty shirt" in that bunch.



And God's biggest joke to stick them all on some of the largest oil fields in the world.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Completely with you on this one!

Was only a matter of time before all this started to come to light, it was broadly hinted at in the furore surrounding Abdul Qadeer Khan.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 04:24 PM
link   
Got to say it doesn't surprise me one little bit.....but then again, why bother getting them off Pakistan when they have the USA to do it's dirty work?



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Freeborn
Got to say it doesn't surprise me one little bit.....but then again, why bother getting them off Pakistan when they have the USA to do it's dirty work?


Because of how Obama and the State Dept. got their butts handed to them in the Middle East by Putin and the Russians. The US is no longer the Big Dog in the Middle East and the Saudis know it. They know they they're unlikely to get Obama to do much of anything against Iran even if he wants to because he and his staff have been exposed as pretty incompetent when it comes to foreign policy, and Russia has taken full advantage of this.

That leaves the Saudis scrambling for any power they can grasp which leaves them scrambling to buy Pakistani nukes and helps destabilize the entire region. Heck, the Saudis are even cozying up with the Israelis and hoping to get the Jews to do their dirty work in Iran, and the Wahhabis hate the Jews as much the Iranians do. But, the enemy of my enemy is my friend in the Middle East.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by MortlitantiFMMJ
 


I have said in at least half a dozen threads that Pakistan is where the next nuclear attack will come from one way or another. They are the most dangerous nuclear state.

They move their nukes around the country in regular moving trucks (no extra armor or security).

So whether one is used by Pakistan, stolen from them, or sold by them, that is where your next nuke attack will come from. Isn't it crazy that if we HAD to go to war with a country over 9/11 it should have been Pakistan rather than Iraq and Afghanistan?



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Been saying it myself for quite some time now - Pakistan is a powder keg just waiting to explode.
Sure as night follows day something 'major' will originate with Pakistan in one shape or another, (and no, that doesn't belong in the Dreams And Predictions Forum, just a personal opinion based on what I've seen, heard, read etc).

But after saying that, I don't trust the Saudi's too.
Again just a personal opinion but to be honest I'd trust Iran before I'd trust Pakistan or Saudi Arabia.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Bisman
 


That right there scared the bejeezus out of the Soviets when Castro asked for control of the weapons they had installed...



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 08:03 AM
link   
reply to post by MortlitantiFMMJ
 


You can't be serious! If this were true Wolf Blitzer would be all over the story. If it were true Kerry would be in talks with Saudi Arabia and not Iran.



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 08:53 AM
link   
So I guess this is how terrorists will get a nuke. The Saudi's will buy it for them.

The US won't attack Syria, then they will do it themselves. People keep on saying Iran is our enemy, perhaps - but I know The House of Saud is not a friend of the west.



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 09:11 AM
link   
The Saudis have been linked to terrorism for a long time now and it was reported on Max keiser that the globe trotting Saudi prince who seems to run things threatened Tony Blair and the Russians with 9/11 events. Its a dangerous situation when one man can control such huge wealth and is bedazzled by the power it brings him.

Its obvious they have the money to buy nuclear weapons and it seems very strange that our Ingtelligence Services did not pick up this deal earlier on with Pakistan. However, do we know if the Pakistani weapons work? They have never deployed them against India, who they don't appear to care for and I can't help wondering what the reason for that is.

I would not be surprised if now the Russians or the Chinese might not supply Iran and so we get the usual status quo that each arsenal cancels out the other's, as common sense says that this will be a bang that Allah may not be able to stop.



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Shiloh7
The Saudis have been linked to terrorism for a long time now and it was reported on Max keiser that the globe trotting Saudi prince who seems to run things threatened Tony Blair and the Russians with 9/11 events. Its a dangerous situation when one man can control such huge wealth and is bedazzled by the power it brings him.

Its obvious they have the money to buy nuclear weapons and it seems very strange that our Ingtelligence Services did not pick up this deal earlier on with Pakistan. However, do we know if the Pakistani weapons work? They have never deployed them against India, who they don't appear to care for and I can't help wondering what the reason for that is.

I would not be surprised if now the Russians or the Chinese might not supply Iran and so we get the usual status quo that each arsenal cancels out the other's, as common sense says that this will be a bang that Allah may not be able to stop.




None of the nuclear powers have deployed their weapons against each other, they know they'd get hit back



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 10:13 AM
link   

ketsuko
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


There's about no one in the Middle East I want on my side ... well, maybe the Kurds. They've been kicked around enough they might turn out civilized if left alone.


Your jokeing right? The more abused and kicked about the people the more brutal and unstable and paranoid. Look at the jews, afghans most if africa ect



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 10:15 AM
link   

GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by MortlitantiFMMJ
 


I have said in at least half a dozen threads that Pakistan is where the next nuclear attack will come from one way or another. They are the most dangerous nuclear state.

They move their nukes around the country in regular moving trucks (no extra armor or security).

So whether one is used by Pakistan, stolen from them, or sold by them, that is where your next nuke attack will come from. Isn't it crazy that if we HAD to go to war with a country over 9/11 it should have been Pakistan rather than Iraq and Afghanistan?


Forget that isreal is the worst nuclear state or its at least equal.





new topics
top topics
 
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join