U.S. Has Plan to Secure Pakistan Nukes if Country Falls to Taliban

[StageLeft]

Link

Not surprising, but good to know that this will happen. I'm concerned about their mobile nature. If Pakistan has 35 nukes now and all are mobile on trains or trucks, is it really safe to say that the US knows about all of them?

 

[Genx87]

I'd say it is not safe we know about all of them.

btw what is with the information? Reminds me of the scene in Airplane where Ted Striker goes through the entire battle plan with Elaine and then at the end cant tell her when he will be back because it is classified.

 

[StageLeft]

Assuming it's deliberately released, it could be that if the Taliban has in some fantasy capacity the idea that they will end up with possession of nukes, this is telling them unequivocally that they will not, so scratch it off the list of benefits of taking over Pakistan.

 

[Lemon law]

This entire thread screams that there is an implied parent child relationship between the USA and Pakistan. Which does not exists.

Then the thesis is that the Taliban is about to take over Pakistan, and that threat is almost non existent. Pakistan has some social and economic problems that could cause a civil war,
but if Pakistan does end up with civil war, its very unlikely the cause would be the Taliban.

But what is a real danger is that changing social conditions and upheavals can destabilize any government, and of known nuclear club members, and in order of danger of instability reaching critical mass, I would have to list Pakistan, Israel, India, and the USA as all being in danger of social collapse.

And in event of the social collapse of any member of the nuclear club, not only will every member of the nuclear club rush in to secure
their share of the loose nukes plunder, so will everyone else and their brother in law. Meanwhile, as for the about to die nation in question, as long as it has any breath left in its body, nukes are the last thing they will ever let go of.

 

[StageLeft]

This entire thread screams that there is an implied parent child relationship between the USA and Pakistan. Which does not exists.

I dunno, the thread before your post was probably under 200 words, it seems they'd have to be masterfully crafted to scream that without outright saying it

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Assuming it's deliberately released, it could be that if the Taliban has in some fantasy capacity the idea that they will end up with possession of nukes, this is telling them unequivocally that they will not, so scratch it off the list of benefits of taking over Pakistan.

Possibly or it gives them a blue print on how we expect to get the nukes.

 

[LTC8K6]

This plan has been in place for a long time. Not sure why it's news now.

 

[tvarad]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
....

But what is a real danger is that changing social conditions and upheavals can destabilize any government, and of known nuclear club members, and in order of danger of instability reaching critical mass, I would have to list Pakistan, Israel, India, and the USA as all being in danger of social collapse.
....

HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,
HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA,HA.HA,
HA!!!!

Haven't had such a good laugh in long time.

 

[Lemon law]

Well I am glad to have tickled tvarad's funny bone with, "Haven't had such a good laugh in long time."

Maybe tvarad could ask the dead head of King Louie the 16'th of France all about how unlikely the French revolution was.

Just one such example of a revolution I could cite, the problems had been building for years, most of the times a nation works
through the problems, but almost like the half lives of radioactive elements, every once in a while, one of those nations disintegrate. For one reason or another, I would still say that Pakistan, Israel, India, and the USA have enough external and internal problems to be potentially unstable.

 

[Triumph]

The US has plans for any event occurring, not just the fall of Pakistan into Taliban hands. This is what the army war college does, they sit around and think of things that could happen, then they think about what they would do about it.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Triumph
The US has plans for any event occurring, not just the fall of Pakistan into Taliban hands. This is what the army war college does, they sit around and think of things that could happen, then they think about what they would do about it.

Has anybody warned them about the hundredth monkey?

 

[yllus]

I remember reading a plan the U.S. authored in the 1960s about how to invade Canada and neutralize our government.

 

[JTsyo]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Well I am glad to have tickled tvarad's funny bone with, "Haven't had such a good laugh in long time."

Maybe tvarad could ask the dead head of King Louie the 16'th of France all about how unlikely the French revolution was.

Just one such example of a revolution I could cite, the problems had been building for years, most of the times a nation works
through the problems, but almost like the half lives of radioactive elements, every once in a while, one of those nations disintegrate. For one reason or another, I would still say that Pakistan, Israel, India, and the USA have enough external and internal problems to be potentially unstable.

Even if there was some kind of upheaval in the other countries you listed, I can't see the incoming government being nuclear trigger happy.

In regards to Pakistan, as long as their nukes aren't stored in tribal regions, I don't think there's much danger of them falling into the wrong hands via an attack. What I would worry about is rouge agents providing nukes to the Taliban though.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: yllus
I remember reading a plan the U.S. authored in the 1960s about how to invade Canada and neutralize our government.

You struck first though and exported Celine Dion. We have since lost our taste for the conquest of Canada.

 

[bamacre]

How exactly would 15K taliban fighters take over Pakistan? This is stupid.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: yllus
I remember reading a plan the U.S. authored in the 1960s about how to invade Canada and neutralize our government.

They carried it out via plan B. You just don't realize it because it was so covert!

 

[brandonbull]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: yllus
I remember reading a plan the U.S. authored in the 1960s about how to invade Canada and neutralize our government.

You struck first though and exported Celine Dion. We have since lost our taste for the conquest of Canada.

No one wants to occupy a foreign land and hear "hoser" ,"take-off, eh", and "aboot" all day everyday. Forget waterboarding.

 

[IGBT]

more then likely a few will leak out by the time they get there. only takes one nuke going off anywhere to plunge world economies into the abyss.

 

[tvarad]

Originally posted by: IGBT
more then likely a few will leak out by the time they get there. only takes one nuke going off anywhere to plunge world economies into the abyss.

I concur. And no country should be smug about not being at the receiving end. Almost all have groups that have one grouse or another that could use it for publicity purposes, at the very least.

 

[Aimster]

Just like we knew were all the chemical weapons were in Iraq... yep

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: Lemon law

But what is a real danger is that changing social conditions and upheavals can destabilize any government, and of known nuclear club members, and in order of danger of instability reaching critical mass, I would have to list Pakistan, Israel, India, and the USA as all being in danger of social collapse.

This post just seals your Europhile credentials. You completely ignore the obvious social instabilities in European nuclear powers which are already close to critical mass.

Have you already forgotten France and the nationwide riots by minorities and other disenfranchised which paralyzed the entire country and alerted the world to the massive social issues which have been completely unaddressed there for decades?

Are you so isolationist in your news that you don't see the massive negative growth rate of Russia along with the growing xenophobia creating social breakdown?

The rise of the ultra far-right in the UK? 20% of the population thinks that a party which has been described as Nazi-like as an acceptable political party.

The European nuclear powers are crumbling in all manners (economically, politically, culturally, socially, etc.), and it should scare the hell out of everyone.

 

[runestone]

Now, reports of Pakistan either constructing new warheads or increasing their stockpile of nuclear materials, all the while accepting billions of dollars of US and European aid:

http://www.google.com/hostedne...u9t5MpFrOTAF-M2ypvQ7aA

 

[Deeko]

I despise the media.

 

[jpeyton]

Pakistan "falling" to the Taliban has slightly worse odds of occurring than the world ending in 2012.

Pakistan has one of the world's largest standing military forces; 7th in active duty personnel, and nearly the same number of reservists.

The problems they face with the Taliban are the same problems the US military faced with the Taliban in Afghanistan: they don't know how to eliminate them in "no-man's land" (the tribal regions on the Afghani/Pakistani border).

You idiots make it sound like the Taliban are marching through the country from north to south capturing cities.

 

[fire400]

If you think about it, even before the article was published, the United States probably already took this into consideration over ten years ago.

The U.S. surveilance systems are probably monitoring every single nuclear weapon and will keep track where it goes if moved. And if it does move, they just send in a speical ops team in to destroy/secure or redeploy the weapon, and then none of us will ever know or hear about it, only if it detonates somewhere in the world where there are a lot of people.

If so, U.S.'ll probably just say they'll disarm the weapon and send it back to the states to get them dismantled and taken care of, but in reality, why would they send those things over seas when they could just sell them to Israel, or sell them to Iran and intentionally invade Iran later for a purposeful cause if Iran doesn't become submissive?