Posted on 05/17/2009 10:42:39 PM PDT by Trueblackman
Could our worst nightmare in the War on Terror could now be possible true?
Does Al-Qeade or the Taliban have one or more bombs from Pakistan's Arsenal?
I was thinking about how naive the Obama White House has been when it comes to the War on Terror, but the last 2 weeks has brought forth this major concern.
It began some two weeks ago, when the Obama White House and State Department publicly became embittered at the fact that Pakistan's civilian leader would not tell them the location or in what condition Pakistan's Nuclear Arsenal happens to be and I am now lead to believe that this ongoing operations in Western Pakistan is simply a cover to recover the stolen weapon(s).
It is a well known fact that many of those inside Pakistan's military and intelligence community are allied with the Taliban and have been for many years, even backing their brutal takeover of Afghanistan in 1996 and afterwards.
Just this Friday, The Times of India reported that in fact that Pakistan's Nuclear Arsenal is in the hands of radicals.
Now comes the story thru FoxNews that officials in the Obama White House have order American Special Forces to secure Pakistan Nuclear Arsenal if the country looked like it would fall in the hands of radical elements.
1)Why would Pakistani Officials now risk all war especially the military with their former allies after all this time, unless there was a major risk involved to Pakistan's survival?
2)Why would the Times of India report such a story? What does India have to gain as it is a nuclear power itself and has no love for the Taliban?
3)Why would officials in the Obama White House all of a sudden use FoxNews to report on a plan to have Special Forces secure Pakistan's Nuclear Arsenal, when the main stream press hangs on Obama's every word and these same officials have nothing but apathy for FoxNews.
4)Notice how Obama has taken steps with his allies in Congress to slow down the closing of Gitmo as late and Eric Holder has stated the Former Bush position that terrorist suspect have no POW Rights.
5)Lastly, I believe that the reason why Obama is allowing the military commission that he once preached against now stand(in the last two weeks)is because could one curtain the public outrage and outcry from the American Public if it became public that Bin Laden, Al-Qeade or the Taliban now had nuclear weapons, military commission are and can be closed to public and all officers and enlisted can be forced to take an oath of silence by the President.
They’d probably give it Iran...the best choice of an Islamic country with nuke know how. IMO.
All I know is radicals getting their hands on even one nuke is pretty much the sum of all fears.
One can only hope they detonate it on themselves in some cave while trying to figure out how to work the thing.
I think if they did steal more than one bomb it could and might end up in Iranian Hands for possible study, but I think the Taliban would use it against surging U.S. Troops entering Afghanistan.
Remember there is a report that Obama is holding off on surging troops into Afghanistan and this might be why.
Nukes aren’t something to keep around forever like a sealed can of .223 ammo. Truly, nukes need a clean lab, experienced technicians, and very special handling/maintenance.
Pakis are pretty clever people, but even there the population capable of maintaining nukes out in the field is miniscule...and the costs are very high.
Plus, detonating just one nuke will open most of SE Asia and the Middle East to a widespread nuclear retaliation.
Moreover, Pakistan fears India. India could take a nuke detonation and not even miss 5 million people out of its 1.1 Billion. India would then roll over Pakistan and the genocide/ethnic cleansing would be unparalleled.
In fact, Pakistan losing control of its nukes would likely cause an invasion from India that would conquer Pakistan and end the anarchy of the tribal border lands.
Faced with nuclear armed India as its neighbor, Pakistanis who hate Israel and the U.S. have a very different reality with which to contend.
So for practical, technical, tactical, and strategic reasons, Al qaeda is unlikely to detonate a nuke. Such a detonation would almost have to be state-sanctioned by Pakistan, North Korea, Russia, Iran, or China...none of which have the missile defenses required to stop the inevitable retaliation.
I would be incline to agree with you points and thought about them, but I am trying to figure out why the military would all of a sudden turn on the Taliban and invade areas it has been scared to go into over the last few years?
Many of Pakistan’s Nuclear Experts have either gone rouge or have been spotted in Iran and North Korea. Anyone of those experts could have ties to the Taliban or Al-Qeade.
India has the most to lose from pakistani nukes. I look for them to do something first.
Obama will NEVER send a nuke anywhere. I doubt very seriously any other weenie Euro trash would send one either. India WOULD be the only one that might retaliate, but if the Taliban gets one, would they pick India or another target like Israel or the US to expend the new toy in? To get control of a nuke and spend it in India, I'm not sure there.
My biggest difference with your scenario is Obama won't pull the trigger and he has pretty much promised he won't. They get a mulligan with Obama. It's hard to talk about, but if NYC, Boston, LA, San Fran, were to get nuked, I'm betting we would retaliate conventionally and within weeks Pelosi and friends would be demanding he withdraw. Sort of a "BUBA BOMBS ASPRIN FACORY" scenario.
My suggested variation on that theme is that Iran's nuke facilities need to have a nuclear "accident". With plausible deniability, that is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.