Posted on 05/30/2002 5:50:13 AM PDT by callisto
United Nations, May 30 (PTI) Pakistan has threatened to use nuclear weapons even if India stuck to conventional arms in any conflict, asserting that it has never subscribed to "no-first-use" of atomic weapons and that ruling out their use would give New Delhi a "license to kill."
"India should not have the license to kill with conventional weapons while Pakistan's hands are tied regarding other means to defend itself," said its new ambassador to the United Nations Munir Akram.
The highly bellicose and provocative statements by Akram on the second day on the job yesterday surprised diplomats and officials at the United Nations who declined to make an immediate comment.
Pakistan, he said, has to rely on the "means it possessed to deter Indian aggression" and would not "neutralise" that deterrence by any doctrine of "no-first-use."
To a question at his first news conference after taking over the job, Akram said any action by India across the border, any aerial attack on Pakistani territory and its assets, and any action to economically strangle it would be "viewed" as aggression and would be "responded to by Pakistan."
Noting that both India and Pakistan possessed nuclear weapons, he said while that should instill restraint on both sides, "it does not seem to do so on the Indian side."
The launching of a sharp attack less than 48 hours after taking over, some diplomats believe, could mean that Pakistan plans to use the United Nations for anti-Indian propaganda.
Akram, who had been his country's ambassador to the UN at Geneva, is known for his rhetoric against India and in previous years had also made highly provocative statements on Kashmir during debates whether the occasion demanded or not.
Pakistan, Akram claimed, believed in "no-first-use of force." That was the reason, he said, that Islamabad had offered non-aggression pact to New Delhi but India had rejected it.
"If India reserved the right to use conventional weapons, how could Pakistan - a weaker power-be expected to rule out all means of deterrence."
The United Nations Charter, the Pakistani ambassador said, prohibited the use of force and India should be committed to "non-use-of-force".
Akarm said the Security Council should address the issues of tensions between India and Pakistan which "constituted a threat to international peace and security."
"Whenever there is a threat of use of force against a member state and a threat to international peace and security, there is an obligation for the Council to address that situation," he told the news conference
Are you willing to gamble the lives of your children on it? I'm sure the islamic fascists will keep on pushing India, Israel, or even us one day to the the use of WMD, those countries will do what they have to do but it won't be a "good thing" and it will have consequences for innocent people all over this world.
Let me guess: your family was immediately downwind of the Nevada Test Site. Look at a globe. Measure the distance between the Nevada Test Site and your home. Then measure the distance between India and your home. The latter distance will be much further, and will serve to massively dilute the fallout delivered to your hometown.
Are you willing to gamble the lives of your children on it?
Well, the non-Islamic COULD just surrender to the jihadists if that will make you feel better.
I assume that the sub-continent has the same western drifting winds of the rest of the world, so Pakistan doesn't have the same problem with fallout that India has.
If Paki attacks the Indian cities, that could cause lots of radiation problems, making it difficult for India to conduct conventional war. But if India nuke retaliates, the wind systems would give them a secondary dose of rads.
"More difficult" is a relative term. India would STILL beat the Pakistanis as if they were the red-headed stepchild.
Uh, ya got me all wrong Poohbah, do a search on my screen name and you will see how I feel about islamofascists. But at the same time a nuclear war is not something to be entered into lightly with joy, IMHO.
However, it DOES rather permanently settle the issue...
No problem, thanks.
However, it DOES rather permanently settle the issue...
I gotta agree with ya on that point!
I keep getting this picture in mind of Musharraf as Daffy Duck screaming, "DOWN DOWN DOWN!!! GO GO GO!!! MINE MINE MINE!!!!"
Are the Pakistanis STUPID enough to attempt a preemptive nuclear strike?
The RADIATION fallout?? Not much, if at all.
The NEWS MEDIA fallout?? Now THAT'S another story...
Here's the nuclear deterrant that the U.S. should use:
"Dear Pakistan,
If you use nuclear weapons against India, the whole world will suffer the consequences of fallout and we shall have no choice but to turn your country into a cinder."
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.