They already have more than Britain, even though they are not self-sufficient in protecting what they have, but reliant on U.S. help. "'Pak will have 200 N-warheads in a decade'," from the Press Trust of India, July 7 (thanks to S):
Washington: Pakistan has the world's fastest-growing nuclear stockpile and it could achieve 150-200 warheads in a decade despite the political instability in the country, two top American atomic experts have said.
Pakistan is in the process of building two new plutonium production reactors and a new reprocessing facility to fabricate more nuclear weapons fuel, wrote nuclear experts Hans M Kristensen and Robert S Norris in the latest issue of Bulletin of Atomic Scientists.
In their paper 'Pakistan's nuclear forces, 2011', the authors estimate that if Pakistan's expansion continues, its nuclear weapons stockpile could reach 150-200.
"Despite its political instability, Pakistan continues to steadily expand its nuclear capabilities and competencies; in fact, it has the world's fastest-growing nuclear stockpile," they wrote.
"We estimate that Pakistan has a nuclear weapons stockpile of 90-110 nuclear warheads, an increase from the estimated 70-90 warheads in 2009," the paper said.
"It is also developing new delivery systems. Enhancements to Pakistan's nuclear forces include a new nuclear capable medium-range ballistic missile, the development of two new nuclear-capable short-range ballistic missiles, and the development of two new nuclear-capable cruise missiles," they wrote.
"With four new delivery systems and two plutonium production reactors under development, however, the rate of Pakistan's stockpile growth may even increase over the next 10 years," they warned.
"The Pakistani government has not defined the number and type of nuclear weapons that its minimum deterrent requires. But Pakistan's pace of nuclear modernization and its development of several short-range delivery systems indicates that its nuclear posture has entered an important new phase and that a public explanation is overdue," the experts said....
"But Pakistan's pace of nuclear modernization and its development of several short-range delivery systems indicates that its nuclear posture has entered an important new phase and that a public explanation is overdue..."
What they don't mention is that Pakistan already has long range delivery systems capable of obliterating any city on earth in the form of jihadists with suitcase plutonium bombs.
"Pakistan "sanctioned" the killing of journalist Saleem Shahzad, the highest-ranking officer in the US military, Admiral Mike Mullen, has said...
...Mr Shahzad, who worked for the Hong Kong-based Asia Times Online and the Italian news agency Adnkronos International, had made a career writing about various Islamist militant networks operating in Pakistan.
Shortly before his death he had written an article about al-Qaeda infiltration in Pakistan's navy.
He reported that the militant group was behind a recent deadly assault on the Mehran base in Karachi because talks had failed over the release of several naval personnel arrested on suspicion of links to al-Qaeda affiliates.
Human rights groups have called Pakistan the most dangerous place in the world for journalists to operate, saying they were under threat from Islamist militants but also Pakistan's military and intelligence agencies." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-14074814
Just great. An unstable Islamic country with 150-200 nuclear weapons. They couldn't find Osama when he was right across the street. They certainly can't take care of nuclear weapons. Pakistan, Iran and other Islamic countries should not be allowed to have these types of weapons. Israel is in grave danger and should be allowed to take them out. The US should shut up and get out of the way. A nuclear war in this part of the world is almost assured, the only question is when? No more money for ANY Islamic country should be our immediate policy. The UN should get involved in their destruction but you can't count on them. The Taliban with nuclear weapons, wonderful!
A few points to put this news in perspective:
- Pakistan is a country that does not have the ability to design a car or a lathe machine - the only way they can design a nuclear weapon and processing plants is through outside help. Read China.
-Pakistan has already delivery mechanisms for small tactical nukes - can smaller people transportable nukes be far behind? Am sure the Chinese will be able to provide them these too.
- Pakistani society cannot compete in a globalized economy - the only legitimate industry was textiles, which now has taken a beating. Only terrorism, opium-trade and threats to use them provides Pakistanis to survive/grow. These threats are now running out of their use-by dates.
- 70-80 nuclear weapons at most are enough to attack and essentially destroy India - Jihadi Delivered Atomic Munitions (JDAM) are probably already within India.
So, these weapons now are not targeted towards India - but, as a weapon of blackmail towards the west.
- Ideologically, there's no difference between Pakistani generals, politicians, Taliban and the Al Qaeda. Jihadis got nuclear weapons, the day the Pakistani army acquired them. Pakistani scientists and ex-generals hanging out with the Taliban has been recorded by us, for quite a while.
Pakistan intends to use these these weapons and the threat of their use in the west, to fund the Pakistani economy - Pakistan and its economy cannot survive without threatening the west or its neighbors.
Without such threats, why would anybody pay billions to such an extremist/terrorist state?
Thanks to the Red Chinese we have this problem. It's time to give Pakistan and Afghanistan to the Red Chinese. They know how to deal with Islamic Extremist. Haven't heard anything from the Chinese Kashmire, have you?
And since they created this problem, the original nuke prints were in Chinese, it's time to retart the Mutual Assurd Destruction (MAD) defense.
One US city gets NUKED, Pakistan and Iran and whoever else we warned gets elliminated.
The second US city to get NUKED, Mecca and median eat the magic mushroom.
The third US city to get nuked and China and Russia does not STARt to work with us NOW, we will unlease ALL our nukes on them. "Bring It On".
Otherwise in the near future we WILL get nuked one city at a time.
Peace Out. LOL!
"The Pakistani government has not defined the number and type of nuclear weapons that its minimum deterrent requires."
The authors of the article just love the idea of 'minimum deterrence'. Britain, India, and perhaps France and China love the idea, as does the Obama administration. But this has problems.
Historically, the US and the USSR did not adhere to it. The US abandoned the idea after the USSR began testing the weapons, primarily due to Soviet secrecy. It is fairly obvious that India is not presently in a nuclear arms race with Pakistan, so unlike the US-USSR example there is no simple reason for Pakistan to be doing what it is doing.
==========================
"But Pakistan's pace of nuclear modernization and its development of several short-range delivery systems indicates that its nuclear posture has entered an important new phase and that a public explanation is overdue..."
So are we demanding an explanation from Pakistan? Ha! Good luck! We'll have to come up with answers on our own.
There are two possible answers.
The first is that Pakistan is seriously considering nuclear war scenarios. They already have the ability to knock India back to the 1400's, but that is a simple deterrent posture. They must be thinking of the kind of war fighting scenarios that were often part of US planning circa 1960-1990: 'limited' war, second and third strikes, a strategic reserve for the NEXT war, etc. This doesn't necessarily mean they are determined to have a nuclear war, but given their past conflicts this must be worrisome.
The second is that Pakistan is poor and is looking to recoup its investment. How many ways can we spell 'bazaar'?
Great post I was thinking the same things you put down. We most certainly need a president who thinks for America's interests only and one who has some balls. The next presidential election maybe the most important one in this country's history.
This issue is really, really serious.
The world is ignoring Pakistan's nukes at its own peril. Pakistan with nukes is the perfect storm. Mark my words- it is not only a matter of time when this storm hits some city(ies) in some part of the world.
The world will then regret that it stood by twiddling its thumb, and even actively abetted Pakistan by financing its nuclear buildup when it could have prevented the whole tragedy from unfolding.
Suicidal Pakistan is not only making the arrangement to go down, but to take the rest of the world down with it in a horrible nuclear holocaust.
As crazy as it sounds MAC, I think you have convinced me that your position is worth consideration by the US Government.
I lived through the Cold War and it definitely frightened me and I wouldn't want to see it come back for any money; but, what is going on in Iran and Pakistan makes it clear we soon will live in a world of AD (Assured Destruction). That is an imminent danger and must be addressed.
As much as I hate to admit it, MAD worked! If there had been a limited number of nuclear bombs in the US and Russian arsenals during the Cold War, sooner or later, one side or the other would have used one if it was advantageous. That would have led to escalation and would have devastated the planet. There would have been survivors but it wouldn't have been a blessing to be in that category.
MAD ensured that there never could be an advantageous situation. Mind you, it worked because there were reasonable men on both sides of the world (some would disagree). That is definitely not the case today, so your plan will have to take that difference into consideration.
One suggestion, seeing as you thought it up, call the new plan MAC (Mutually Assured Catastrophe).
I do have some questions for you on how you see your plan working.
How do you contemplate the US avoiding a full scale nuclear war (MAC) by mistake?
For example, in Scenario 1 of your plan, you propose a massive (?) retaliation against Pakistan and Iran. I'm certainly in total agreement with your argument that there must be retribution but:
1) how does the US nuke Iran without scaring the sh*t out of Russia. The Russians are going to detect a missile or worse missiles coming in their direction and they can't be sure that the US isn't targeting them or targeting them along with Iran.
If you are planning to do the strike with bombers or jets, can their arrival at the targets be guaranteed considering today's defense technologies? Where would these bombers and jets launch from and would those launch sites be subject to attack by Iran prior to the destruction of the American city? Are you maybe thinking of having a permanently-in-the-air bomber strike force? That system was implemented during the Cold War.
2) Even if there is a way of convincing Russia not to execute a precautionary retaliatory strike against the US, how can you convince them to allow the US strike anyway? If the US strike is massive with multiple targets in Iran, the fallout is going to go into Russian airspace. That could (would?) result in considerable Russian fatalities.
3) Wouldn't the same in 2) also apply for India? I have no problem with retaliating against Pakistan, but a massive strike would run the risk of seriously damaging India who is an ally.
Do you think it is possible to make retributive alliances with Russia and India where the US gets justice by proxy meaning that Russia strikes Iran and determines the level of retaliation that won't seriously cause harm to it's own people and India does likewise to Pakistan?
I was also wondering whether you might consider changing the order of who gets nuked first.
What I'm driving at is that the destruction of Mecca should be the priority and that priority will be publicly known around the world. Maybe I'm oversimplifying the situation but with Mecca incinerated and uninhabitable for centuries (possibly) wouldn't that be the single greatest disaster to Islam. It would make it impossible for Muslims to do the Hajj. As I recall, that is one of the pillars of Islam.
So, all of Islam is put on alert that they are being held "hostage" (boy they'll love that irony) for the good nuclear behaviour of all Islamic terrorists, including Pakistan and Iran.
Perhaps that may have the effect of giving holocaust-oriented Muslims pause for sober second thought. It might even talk some non-terrorist Muslims into turning in terrorists in order to protect Mecca.
Anyway, as I said at the beginning, MAD is a scary thought but maybe MAC can be characterized in a more benign way than was its grandfather. As one of your great Presidents said "Speak softly but carry a big stick."
I hope you are a US citizen, I think a well thought out plan along what you are currently thinking, might get a hearing if presented to the right circles of the US government. If you have a good Congressman in your state you may be able to convince him pass your plan on to the Administration.
Obviously, you would have to wait until Obama is replaced by a real President (no inflection against your country or the office, just the person).
Obviously, you would have to take care in your wording, making sure that you said nothing that an opponent could intentionally misconstrue as monstrous, or the ravings of a lunatic. That is why you would use the acronym MAC instead of MAD.
By the way, the waiting period until you get a new President works to your advantage because it gives you the chance to 'flesh' out your idea so it becomes a real plan instead of an interesting idea. I hope in the fleshing out period you give thought to including attacks on Israel as being the same as an attack on a US city.
One further thought, you will need in your plan a way to handle Britain or France if either of these two countries looks like it is going to Islamize itself.
In WW2, Britain was forced into destroying the French fleet when France fell because Britain and France had no treaty to surrender their fleet to the other if they fell to Germany. You don't want the US in a position where it has to nuke British or French territory for self protection. You don't want the US fleets being put in a position where they have to hunt down and sink the fleet of a former ally.
Good idea. I hope you do something with it.
Thanks Pete. The trouble is that Red China has enabled the North Koreans to Nuke up as the Russians have allowed/assisted Iran. They need to work with us, if they assist others to nuke us they MUST know we will nuke them as the enabler. Losin a city at a time over a period of time IS NOT an option.
The Russians were missing 142 Man Pack Nukes in 1996 and I beleive the Ukranians swear their previous gov sold the Iraninas somthing like 35 ICBM warheads. So a boat or container is the most likely source for a bigin, and across the Mex/American border the man packs.
For the Bush and now President Obama's administration to leave our borders wide open is crinimal and TRAITORIST. I beleive they want us nuked so they can declare Martial Law and even hasten more their creation of the New World Order.
Of course this is all speculation. But I bet we will get nuked in the near future. THE WORLD MUST KNOW OUR PLANNED RETALIATION, and the to h3ll with what the rest of the world thinks. Peace out.
No, the global jihad would have that many nuclear weapons.
I imagine the number of bombs would have to equal the number of major cities around the world which would be held hostage in the cause of submission to Islamic rule.
You are welcome MAC. Good luck if you decide to develop a plan and pass it on.
I've always looked at the the removal of the defense along the US/Mexico border as incompetent or borderline criminal but you are right, it is treason.
The Oath of Office of the President of the United States required George W. Bush and now requires Barak H. Obama to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Abandoning the border was/is tantamount to inviting up to 146 terrorists each equipped with a portable nuclear bomb into the USA.
By the way, thanx for that number, I was aware of the fact, but not of the scope, of the missing portable nukes.
There is one small bit of good news about the portable nukes, they were designed in a period when 'shelf-life' was 'short' due to technology limitations.
You might be interested in this article by Las Alamos on the deterioration of warheads.
http://www.lanl.gov/quarterly/q_w03/shelf_life.shtml
So, the portable nukes may be unusable in a few years at most. Hopefully, Russia doesn't provide 'extended warranties' on the products they sell to terrorists'
The degradation of nuclear warheads will also start playing havoc with the Pakistan program. The more nukes they build the more really expensive maintenance issues they will have to face. (Same for N. Korea).
This makes cutting off foreign aid to Pakistan absolutely necessary. But I suspect it won't happen, despite all the cries from Jihad Watch to do so.
By the way, do you know if anyone in Congress has suggested abandoning the border is treasonous? I'm sure such a claim would be considered outrageous but it may be the only way to draw attention to the potential danger.
Let us all hope that things work out that not even one American city is harmed due to these international terrorist dirtbags.
I'm hoping the US decides to stay in Iraq. It is a nice place to station a large US land and air force to intimidate Iran into abandoning its nuke program.
I think the US should be pushing for the UN to get its nuclear inspectors into Iran before year end to do a thorough audit. If that audit shows what everyone fears, Iran should be put in the same position Saddam Hussein was put in when he didn't comply.
I guess under the current Administration that is a ridiculously futile hope but maybe Congress itself will come to its senses and see the advantage is with the US at the moment, while they are still in Iraq.
Nice talking to ya MAC
Hi Mary. Woof, have you brought up something scary.
My heart-of-hearts wants to say you are wrong but reason tells me you are quite right.
Your scenario is similar to the one shown in Independence Day with Jeff Goldblum. In that movie, there was a solution to the problem by thinking 'outside the box'. I don't think any 'outside the box' brainstorm can defend the world against what you are thinking.
If it happens, we may have to bite the bullet by taking an unthinkable number of casualties in order to preserve our freedoms and culture.
Submitting to a 'culture' that would do what you are suggesting could never be an option. Submitting to such a culture would be an act of evil.
For someone my age, biting the bullet seems acceptable. I haven't got that much to lose but it is horrific that the young should face such a choice especially when it is my generation, and the one that succeeded it, that brought the world to this situation. We were cowards and let evil prevail. We screwed up; but, it will be those who came after us who will have to pay the price for our cowardice.
I can't quite say, "nice talkin' to ya Mary", the topic is too distressing but I can say, "have a nice day." Oh, and nice talkin to ya anyway.
The big thing the MSM didn't tell us was about the ex Russian who was poisened by the Polonium 210 in London is that he ReVerted to Islam and that Polonium 210 is used as a TRIGGER in nukes that has to be replaced every 3 years or so to keep them active.
So instead of being poisened by the Russians, he could havve been muleing the Polonium for a terrorist organization to freshen a Nuke and suffered from radiation poisening and blamed the Russians. Easy enough to do since the Russians/Putin kills a dissident/journalist every couple months, and that does even take into consideration those that are heart attacked and cancered. LOL!
Sorry, ain't trying to ruin your day.
Ruining my day! You just gave me diarrhea for a week! Sh*t!