| 8 | “see the links below:” |
Interesting links, here is what I gleaned from them.
Pakistani nuclear forces
This is a report written by Shannon N. Kile, a researcher for a leftist, anti-war think tank in Stockholm (good choice, btw). But even he says: "Some of these weapons are probably stored in unassembled form at dispersed locations". "Some" and "probably"? Hmmm, not exactly ringing endorsement of your "it is a well known fact...".
I see that your expert Kile also says that Pakistan has only "30–50 nuclear weapons", rather than your hyperbole in post #1 of "about a 100 nuclear warheads". You seem to be gaining quite a rep for posting unreliable and hyped claims.
Pakistan Special Weapons Facilities
Almost the same as with your first link, this GlobalSecurity.org webpage says: "Reportedly, most of these weapons are stockpiled as separate uranium and plutonium cores and detonation assemblies". "Reportedly" and "most"? What happened to "it is a well known fact..."? LOL, It looks like they didn't get your memo!
That webpage also says that "Pakistan is believed to [have] somewhere between two and three dozen nuclear weapons". What happened to the "about a 100 nuclear warheads", that you promised us?
Pakistan Moves Nuclear Weapons
Actually, this was a good link and well worth reading, thanks. On the one hand, while this Washington Post article says: "Pakistan's military began relocating critical nuclear weapons components", that one article hardly buttresses your claim that "it is a well known fact...". But on the other hand, it does substantiate your claim that at least some of the Pakistani nuclear warhead stockpile has, for security reasons, been disassembled into major components and stored in separate locals. Hmmm, Mushi seems pleased with this additional security, so does President Bush, but you don't. Why do you suppose that is? </rhetorical question>
But just like in your previous two links, the WP authors of that article state that Pakistan has "between 30 and 40 warheads", rather than the "about a 100 nuclear warheads" you hyped in your post #1. Have you always had this problem with "fudging" the truth?
Your WP source also goes on to state: "Musharraf...now controls the nuclear weapons program...by virtue of his position as army chief of staff...Pakistan's nuclear program has always been under the control of the military". Since this was your "expert" source, maybe you could use this as an answer to your own question about whether I had any proof that the Pakistani Generals control all their nuclear weapons. (Forgive my reticence to answer that question earlier, but I just felt like I was being asked for proof that the sun will rise tomorrow.)
| 8 | “Wrong. You are changing the ground again with your own definition.” |
I don't think I've ever met an FR poster so willing to digress, go off topic, change the subject, ramble on endlessly and invent strawmen, as I've seen you do. I'm still not sure whether it is just your unfortunate personality trait or whether it is done deliberately to obfuscate the issue when you've painted yourself into a corner, like you did with the still unanswered challenge to...
“This is serious stuff. These guys hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads!” --Saberwielder at #1
In over 80 posts, you have offered NO PROOF, whatsoever, that "these guys" had any direct access to nuclear weapons or even nuclear weapon components, nor that any of them had any command authority nor the security codes necessary to launch and/or detonate a nuclear device. Thus, your claim is a lie.
Your willful failure to directly retract this defamation, means it will stand as a glaring example of the lies you promulgate here on FR, and your agenda to undermine the Bush doctrine in Pakistan. Your hatred of Mushi and Pakistan overrides your professed support for the GWOT.
You have branded yourself as dishonest.
--Boot Hill