Hello There, Guest! Registered users see far less ads! Register today and join our virtual tailgate. (Login — Register)

Post Reply 
Pakistani Dilemma: Nuclear War or Civil War?
Author Message
WoodlandsOwl Offline
Up in the Woods
*

Posts: 11,806
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 115
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #1
Pakistani Dilemma: Nuclear War or Civil War?
IMO the Indians wouldn't nuke Pakistan because the prevailing winds would blow the fallout back on India. But a conventional war is likely unless the Pakistanis give up the terrorists.

The capture of one of the ten Mumbai terrorists has been a disaster for Pakistan. The captured terrorist talked, and his information checked out, and made it clear that Pakistan was tolerating Islamic terrorist groups operating openly inside Pakistan.

This is nothing new, but such dramatic proof is. The U.S., the UN and most other major countries put the pressure on Pakistan to do something about this, or risk being officially branded a pro-terrorist state. Pakistan responded to that pressure in the last week by arresting several senior terrorist leaders known to be operating in Pakistan.

But Pakistan refused to allow India to take these terrorists. That's because if these guys began talking, they would confirm Pakistan's long term support of Islamic terrorist activities.

These are admissions that Pakistan does not want to deal with. Nevertheless, Pakistan has long been known as a supporter of Islamic terrorists, even though some of these terrorist organizations are trying to kill Pakistani leaders. That is a rather recent development, which came about after September 11, 2001, when the Pakistani leadership were forced to decide between backing the war on terror, or siding with the terrorists. At that point, some Islamic terrorists began attacking Pakistani leaders. But others, like those responsible for the Mumbai attacks (Lashkar e Toiba) did not support the overthrow of the Pakistani government (at least not right away), and continued to be protected by the government.

But Lashkar e Toiba continued to plan attacks inside India, which India has warned could lead to nuclear war. But Pakistan did not want to enrage another bunch of Islamic terrorists. Now they have no choice, or do they?

India and the United States are watching closely exactly what Pakistan does to the "Kashmir (dedicated to taking Kashmir from Indian control) terrorists" like Lashkar e Toiba. Pakistan has made a few arrests, and everyone is waiting to see if, or when, Pakistan will do some real damage to these groups. So far, Pakistan has not.
Groups like Lashkar e Toiba are very popular in Pakistan, because getting control of Kashmir is very popular. The government fears that going after the Kashmir terrorists would cause a civil war inside Pakistan. That has always been a risk, which even India acknowledged.

But now the Indian government has a population enraged about the activities (like Mumbai, and similar attacks earlier) of the Pakistani Kashmir terror groups, and wants something done. Pakistan is being forced into a corner, where the choices come down to civil war with their Islamic conservatives and radicals (about a third of the population), or war with India, which could escalate into a nuclear conflict that Pakistan would lose. The civil war would be messy, but the government would almost certainly win it.

Pakistani politicians, being risk averse, are looking for some way out of this mess. There doesn't seem to be one.

http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/india/ar...81210.aspx
12-10-2008 08:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


DrTorch Offline
Proved mach and GTS to be liars
*

Posts: 35,844
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 201
I Root For: ASU, BGSU
Location:

CrappiesDonatorsBalance of Power Contest
Post: #2
RE: Pakistani Dilemma: Nuclear War or Civil War?
Like you say, India wouldn't go to nuclear war right away. If Pakistan doesn't do something, India might launch some missiles w/ conventional warheads. Then Pakistan would decide whether to escalate.

I don't think they will. I think they'll make concessions at that point, declaring their nuclear arsenal severly damaged or somesuch.
12-10-2008 08:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SumOfAllFears Offline
Grim Reaper of Misguided Liberal Souls
*

Posts: 18,182
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation: 58
I Root For: America
Location:
Post: #3
RE: Pakistani Dilemma: Nuclear War or Civil War?
It's possible that they have tactical nukes. Battlefield Nuclear Weapons could be used by either side. Problem is it could lead to a larger exchange. This is why allowing Muslim Countries to have nuclear weapons is very dangerous. F___k you, A.Q. Khan



http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/...n/khan.htm
(This post was last modified: 12-10-2008 10:11 AM by SumOfAllFears.)
12-10-2008 10:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DrTorch Offline
Proved mach and GTS to be liars
*

Posts: 35,844
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 201
I Root For: ASU, BGSU
Location:

CrappiesDonatorsBalance of Power Contest
Post: #4
RE: Pakistani Dilemma: Nuclear War or Civil War?
SumOfAllFears Wrote:It's possible that they have tactical nukes.

While possible, I believe it is highly improbable.
12-10-2008 11:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SumOfAllFears Offline
Grim Reaper of Misguided Liberal Souls
*

Posts: 18,182
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation: 58
I Root For: America
Location:
Post: #5
RE: Pakistani Dilemma: Nuclear War or Civil War?
DrTorch Wrote:
SumOfAllFears Wrote:It's possible that they have tactical nukes.

While possible, I believe it is highly improbable.

There were tactical nukes in 1962 during the Cuban missile crisis. The mere threat of POSSIBLE battlefield nukes is unnerving enough, is it not? Its just they are CRAZY enough to use them.

Quote:Unknown to U.S. intelligence for 30 years, the Soviet Union had sneaked about 100 small nuclear weapons into Cuba at the time of the 1962 missile crisis

The real question still remains: Is there such a thing as a "limited nuclear attack"?
(This post was last modified: 12-10-2008 11:29 AM by SumOfAllFears.)
12-10-2008 11:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Tripster Offline
Most Dangerous Man on a Keyboard
*

Posts: 3,140
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation: 16
I Root For: The Best Only
Location: Where the Action is
Post: #6
RE: Pakistani Dilemma: Nuclear War or Civil War?
.

As Pissed Off as I am in the World Right Now .....

I have to agree with Dr. Gene Scott:

"Nuke 'Em In The Name Of Jesus" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

03-lmfao 03-lmfao 03-lmfao 03-lmfao 03-lmfao 03-lmfao

.
12-10-2008 12:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jugnaut Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,840
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 484
I Root For: UCF
Location: Florida
Post: #7
RE: Pakistani Dilemma: Nuclear War or Civil War?
It would be kinda awesome if India took out all the extremist in Pakistan including Osama with their Nukes...it would just suck for the 5 or 6 normal people there.
12-10-2008 12:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
smn1256 Offline
I miss Tripster
*

Posts: 28,847
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation: 337
I Root For: Lower taxes
Location: North Mexico
Post: #8
RE: Pakistani Dilemma: Nuclear War or Civil War?
If Pakistan nukes India who will answer the phones when I call Dell or Microsoft?
12-10-2008 01:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WoodlandsOwl Offline
Up in the Woods
*

Posts: 11,806
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 115
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #9
RE: Pakistani Dilemma: Nuclear War or Civil War?
DrTorch Wrote:Like you say, India wouldn't go to nuclear war right away. If Pakistan doesn't do something, India might launch some missiles w/ conventional warheads. Then Pakistan would decide whether to escalate.

I don't think they will. I think they'll make concessions at that point, declaring their nuclear arsenal severly damaged or somesuch.

For security purposes, Pakistani nukes are not "unitary"... they are not ready to "go" on short notice.

Part of the "package" (fissile material) is kept at a separate location from the rest of the warhead. You have to have both parts and do some final assembly before it becomes operational.

Then you have to load the completed weapon on a missile or aircraft.
12-10-2008 02:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2026 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2026 MyBB Group.