Pakistan is in danger of collapse within months

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: tvarad
I am surprised that no one is yet talking of a contingency plan for Pakistan's nukes.
You think they aren't? I bet both the US and India have plans in the works in case Islamabad falls, they just aren't going to have a public debate about it.

I would guess they already have those areas targeted for carpet bombing.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,861
6,396
126
Originally posted by: Modelworks
They are long way from the nuclear arsenal. I was curious so I looked it up using google maps and the info from the last government reports of where they store the nuclear materials and weapons. It is over 145 miles from the capital and about 170 miles from where the Taliban is now. Still the Taliban are going to use every person they can to try to pull this off.

Image showing where nuclear materials are compared to where they are near the capital.
http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/530/pakh.jpg

3 hours Drive....yup, nothing to worry about.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Modelworks
They are long way from the nuclear arsenal. I was curious so I looked it up using google maps and the info from the last government reports of where they store the nuclear materials and weapons. It is over 145 miles from the capital and about 170 miles from where the Taliban is now. Still the Taliban are going to use every person they can to try to pull this off.

Image showing where nuclear materials are compared to where they are near the capital.
http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/530/pakh.jpg

3 hours Drive....yup, nothing to worry about.

Look at the google maps closer. It isn't like driving down the interstate.
We could destroy anything with hours to spare before it ever got close to the sites.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
86
91
Originally posted by: K1052
If the Taliban moves on Islamabad the US and possibly India is going to to be forced into undertaking drastic military action.

Under absolutely no circumstances can the Pakistani nuclear arsenal be allowed even the slightest possibility of falling into Taliban control, it must be secured at any and all costs.

I hope people remember this thread the next time there is a "If America can have nukes, why can't Iran (or insert other small nation) blah blah" post. This is exactly the reason why. Overnight you can go from having some control over a nuclear arsenal to a group like the taliban getting the golden egg.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Just saw on the news, the Taliban blew up a NATO fuel depot.
The defense department is pissed right now. I can imagine there are some very itchy trigger fingers . They are mentioning Article 5 .
 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,763
327
126
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Just saw on the news, the Taliban blew up a NATO fuel depot.
The defense department is pissed right now. I can imagine there are some very itchy trigger fingers . They are mentioning Article 5 .

Link?? I am not finding anything right now. I do know 6 tankers were blown up a couple days ago at a fuel depot.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Originally posted by: dphantom
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Just saw on the news, the Taliban blew up a NATO fuel depot.
The defense department is pissed right now. I can imagine there are some very itchy trigger fingers . They are mentioning Article 5 .

Link?? I am not finding anything right now. I do know 6 tankers were blown up a couple days ago at a fuel depot.

It was a news story on the cnn tv channel. They were interviewing a major in Afghanistan that said they had been attacking individual tankers but this time had attacked the actual depot. Then he said that it being a Nato site it was possible Article 5 could be used to justify action . He did say that it did not effect the troops in Afghanistan because they got fuel from other sources.

 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,763
327
126
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: dphantom
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Just saw on the news, the Taliban blew up a NATO fuel depot.
The defense department is pissed right now. I can imagine there are some very itchy trigger fingers . They are mentioning Article 5 .

Link?? I am not finding anything right now. I do know 6 tankers were blown up a couple days ago at a fuel depot.

It was a news story on the cnn tv channel. They were interviewing a major in Afghanistan that said they had been attacking individual tankers but this time had attacked the actual depot. Then he said that it being a Nato site it was possible Article 5 could be used to justify action . He did say that it did not effect the troops in Afghanistan because they got fuel from other sources.

NP, not arguing, but I think he was referring then to the incident a couple days ago.

The security of the supply line through Khyber is very poor and is why the US and NATO were pushing hard to open up other routes through teh "stans" which tehy have now successfully done.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Originally posted by: dphantom
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: dphantom
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Just saw on the news, the Taliban blew up a NATO fuel depot.
The defense department is pissed right now. I can imagine there are some very itchy trigger fingers . They are mentioning Article 5 .

Link?? I am not finding anything right now. I do know 6 tankers were blown up a couple days ago at a fuel depot.

It was a news story on the cnn tv channel. They were interviewing a major in Afghanistan that said they had been attacking individual tankers but this time had attacked the actual depot. Then he said that it being a Nato site it was possible Article 5 could be used to justify action . He did say that it did not effect the troops in Afghanistan because they got fuel from other sources.

NP, not arguing, but I think he was referring then to the incident a couple days ago.

The security of the supply line through Khyber is very poor and is why the US and NATO were pushing hard to open up other routes through teh "stans" which tehy have now successfully done.

Might be, but they said it had just happened.
 

tvarad

Golden Member
Jun 25, 2001
1,130
0
0
Originally posted by: CanOWorms
It's amazing how the actions of the British Empire are still terrorizing the world.

Most of the post-colonial problems stem from the fact that those societies reverted back to their time-honored tradition of tribal/feudal rule (under different guises) once the British left. Pakistan is no exception.
 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Originally posted by: tvarad
Originally posted by: CanOWorms
It's amazing how the actions of the British Empire are still terrorizing the world.

Most of the post-colonial problems stem from the fact that those societies reverted back to their time-honored tradition of tribal/feudal rule (under different guises) once the British left. Pakistan is no exception.

Actually it's the rich vs the poor just like everywhere else in the world.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
I very much doubt the Taliban want to take over Pakistan. And as we can see, they are acutely aware of public relations and what it takes to get popular support. As it becomes apparent that the Buner district sounds alarm bells and confrontation, the Taliban cites past truces for a face saving retreat.
 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,763
327
126
Originally posted by: Lemon law
I very much doubt the Taliban want to take over Pakistan. And as we can see, they are acutely aware of public relations and what it takes to get popular support. As it becomes apparent that the Buner district sounds alarm bells and confrontation, the Taliban cites past truces for a face saving retreat.

You really have no clue.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
One thing for sure dphantom, one of us fits the "You really have no clue."

If you want a clue, look back at Afghanistan, where Nato flops as badly or worse. And for seven out of seven years Nato has done worse because people like you have no clue on why we are failing.

And the short answer why we are failing is because we destabilized everything, brought in corruption and anarchy in the process, and then don't do anything to fix it. And then we wonder why the Taliban wins with the message of through the Western Rascals out. Now we doing a rinse and repeat in the Tribal areas of Pakistan, and as a result its great for the Taliban.

Pakistan was in far better shape before Nato came into the region, and now all Nato does is to be the best advertisement
for the Taliban.


 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
53,741
48,410
136
Originally posted by: Lemon law
One thing for sure dphantom, one of us fits the "You really have no clue."

If you want a clue, look back at Afghanistan, where Nato flops as badly or worse. And for seven out of seven years Nato has done worse because people like you have no clue on why we are failing.

And the short answer why we are failing is because we destabilized everything, brought in corruption and anarchy in the process, and then don't do anything to fix it. And then we wonder why the Taliban wins with the message of through the Western Rascals out. Now we doing a rinse and repeat in the Tribal areas of Pakistan, and as a result its great for the Taliban.

Pakistan was in far better shape before Nato came into the region, and now all Nato does is to be the best advertisement
for the Taliban.

NATO action that pushed the Taliban out of Afganistan has proved a catalyst for longstanding social and economic issues in Pakistan to finally threaten the existence of the country. As long as the ruling elites could maintain something near the status quo they could oppress dissent but now they're facing a motivated opponent and a populace with an axe to grind.
 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,763
327
126
Originally posted by: Lemon law
One thing for sure dphantom, one of us fits the "You really have no clue."

If you want a clue, look back at Afghanistan, where Nato flops as badly or worse. And for seven out of seven years Nato has done worse because people like you have no clue on why we are failing.

And the short answer why we are failing is because we destabilized everything, brought in corruption and anarchy in the process, and then don't do anything to fix it. And then we wonder why the Taliban wins with the message of through the Western Rascals out. Now we doing a rinse and repeat in the Tribal areas of Pakistan, and as a result its great for the Taliban.

Pakistan was in far better shape before Nato came into the region, and now all Nato does is to be the best advertisement
for the Taliban.

:disgust:
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
I don't know what you guys are worried (and arguing) about ....

We're pumping billions of dollars of military training and hardware into the region which is going to come back and bite us in the ass 20 years from now, anyway ...
 

Mxylplyx

Diamond Member
Mar 21, 2007
4,197
101
106
It seems apparent that civilian rule may just not be in the cards for Pakistan. Maybe it is time for Musharraf to end his vacation and put an end to this.
 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,763
327
126

The military has the "resolve" to fight the militants. Well, when are we going to see it? The withdrawal from Buner is for show only. Effectively, Buner is fully Taliban controlled. Mardan and Swabi are next.

if the military is playing a game in holding back until the civilian government fails and there are public calls for the military to save Pakistan, the Pakistani generals are playing a very dangerous game.

We'll see over the next 3-5 months. Snows are melting and the summer offensive season is fast approaching. I personally would nto be surprised to see Peshawar including the city descend into Sharia law and Taliban control this year.