Pak moving towards more destructive nuclear weapons: US think-tank

Discussion in 'West Asia & Africa' started by NikSha, May 29, 2009.

  1. NikSha

    NikSha Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    337
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    DELHI
    TOI

    WASHINGTON: Pakistan is moving towards a nuclear weapons program that is more destructive and deliverable, a US think tank said on Thursday.

    "Pakistan is likely supplementing or replacing its current uranium-based nuclear weapon arsenal with plutonium-based weapons which will be more destructive and deliverable," said Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) in response to a news article in Washington Post published on Pakistan's nuclear program.

    Washington-based ISIS said The Washington Post called Pakistan's imminent development of nuclear-tipped cruise missiles and perhaps thermonuclear weapons a sign of a "more mature" program, as if to imply that more destructive nuclear weapons somehow lead to a better nation.

    "By incorrectly describing what is going on in Pakistan, these choices of words distort the debate before it even starts," ISIS said. In the last two weeks, Pakistan has sought to turn the public debate over its nuclear program into a binary choice between Pakistan expanding its program and Pakistan modernizing its program, it said, adding that the truth, however, is more complex.

    "Modernising" a nuclear weapons program, rather, should at most be interpreted as improving the security of existing nuclear weapons, increasing security of fissile material in storage, at military and civilian nuclear industrial sites, or in transit, ISIS said.
     
  2.  
  3. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,553
    Likes Received:
    6,564
    looks like n korea plutonium program details has been shared with pakistan.
     
  4. Sridhar

    Sridhar House keeper Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    3,473
    Likes Received:
    1,015
    Pak exchanged N-tech for N Korean long range missiles: US
    2 Jun 2009, 0932 hrs IST, PTI
    Print Email Discuss Share Save Comment Text:
    WASHINGTON: North Korea received designs for uranium enrichment centrifuges from Pakistan's disgraced nuclear scientist A Q Khan in return for
    its long-range missiles, a Congressional report has told US lawmakers.

    "Hwang Jang-yop, a Communist Party secretary who defected in 1997, has stated that North Korea and Pakistan agreed in the summer of 1996 to trade North Korean long-range missile technology for Pakistani HEU (highly enriched uranium) technology," the report on North Korean nuclear weapons programme has said.

    Other information on North Korean-Pakistani cooperation dates back to 1993, said the report by Congressional Research Service (CRS) - the research wing of the US Congress.

    North Korea has been exporting missiles to countries in the Middle East and South Asia and has had joint collaboration in development of missiles with Iran and Pakistan, it said.

    In the 1990s, North Korea exported Scud and Nodong missiles to Pakistan, Iran, Yemen, Syria and reportedly Egypt. It entered into joint development programmes with both Pakistan and Iran.

    Pyongyang received designs for uranium enrichment centrifuges from Pakistan nuclear "czar" A Q Khan and has attempted to purchase overseas key components for uranium enrichment centrifuges, but some of these purchases have been blocked, according to the report.

    Pak exchanged N-tech for N Korean long range missiles: US - US - World - The Times of India
     
  5. Su-47

    Su-47 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    18
    Open secret. Everyone knows Pak missiles are NK missiles with green paint on them.

    I just wish Indian govt would grow a pair of balls and actually do something to address this threat, like expanding our own arsenal, fast-tracking the ABM program, and most importantly, having a plan to take out most pak nukes before they are launched.
     
  6. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,553
    Likes Received:
    6,564
  7. F-14

    F-14 Global Defence Moderator Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,563
    Likes Received:
    19

    Pakistani Missile Progarm is just a panting Operation thats why we call the Pakistanis Experts at panting
     
  8. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    Neutron bombs are mainly for tactical use while atomic and H-bomb are strategic.

    N bombs are primarily to take out troops and tank crews.
     
  9. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,553
    Likes Received:
    6,564
    we are worried about using nukes against pakistan because of fallout , using many neutron bombs can achieve the same goals as nukes with limited fallout.
     
  10. NikSha

    NikSha Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    337
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    DELHI
    Hehe... pants are fun. :blum3:

    Can't wait for the WW3. We will all probably die but wth, at least that will please most people posting crap about India around here. India should just concentrate on indigenous development of something like AWACS (so that we won't be blackmailed and charged more) and a missile shield.
     
  11. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    Nik, read the AWACS thread about some information on why the Phalcons is more expensive now.


    @LF:N bomb is pretty much useless if you want to blow up a city. A large number of N bombs is pretty much useless too(too expensive) when a single H bomb is enough.

    N bombs are primarily used against tank formations. Tanks can withstand the blast of a nuclear bomb at very close ranges. The crew will be safe. But, a N bomb penetrates tank armor easily and kills the crew. N bombs are basically large scale Anti-tank weaponry.

    Even that's supposed to change with the new generation tanks that India and Russia will make.

    N bombs have very small yields. The biggest ones could be 1-2 Kilotons. The fallout is low because of its small yield. But, it wont blow up a city.
     
  12. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,553
    Likes Received:
    6,564
    p2p i am just trying to keep fallout to a minimum and destruction to a maximum so i guess h-bombs and neutron bombs would be good candidates, India by the way easily make a hydrogen bomb( see tritium thread)
     
  13. Su-47

    Su-47 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    18
  14. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,553
    Likes Received:
    6,564
    the weapon systems may survive but will the humans? a powerful EMP blast should also destroy communications for many mile radius so many weapons may still become useless.
     
  15. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,553
    Likes Received:
    6,564
    Jihad Watch: EMP: The next Iranian strategic threat to the US Mainland?

    EMP: The next Iranian strategic threat to the US Mainland?

    Walid Phares discusses one serious challenge the Obama administration could face:

    As the transition teams are working on updating the President elect and his national security advisors on the several challenges awaiting the new Administration, the threat environment for the near and medium future is widening as new strategic menaces are projected. One of these threats may affect nationals security planning for years to come.

    Over the past seven months I have been interacting with US Homeland Security and European defense officials and experts on a the potential next threat to the West, more particularly against mainland America. The signature of that strategic menace is EMP: Electro Magnetic Pulse; a weapon of the future, already available in design, construction and possible deployment. As eyes are focused on the Iranian nuclear threat, and as we began recently to understand that the missile advances are as important then the fissile material development, attention is now being drawn by private sector projects and some in the defense world to what can cause a wider circle of damages and thus more deterrence against US national security.

    In short, and I borrow from the Project "Shield America" an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack could be triggered by a nuclear warhead detonated at high altitude over America. The resulting blast would create an EMP, a shockwave that could "cripple military and civilian communications, power, transportation, water, food, and other infrastructure." Even if a high-altitude EMP kills nobody at first, it would paralyze a large section of the United States. The lingering practical and economic effects would take anywhere from hours to years to resolve: when secondary effects are considered, an EMP could be even deadlier than a direct nuclear strike against the mainland. Indeed, Rep. Roscoe Bartlett has written: "Where the terrorist airliner attacks of 9/11 killed thousands, a terrorist EMP attack could indirectly kill millions and conceivably cause the permanent collapse of our entire society."

    By realizing how fundamental and irreversible is the reliance of the United States on electronics for every aspect of its citizens' lives, we can also realize how this makes the U.S. vulnerable to an emerging threat. Which brings about the issue of identifying the origination point of such a menace. Many indicators direct us to Iran. In previous articles on CTB and other outlets I have focused on the "missiles threat" as a dossier by itself independently from the "Nuclear" file for a rational consideration: Missiles can be used to deliver nuclear weapons, but also "other weapons" including chemical and biological. In the case of Hezbollah's mini war of July 2006 with Israel, large rockets and small missiles were conceived as classical but were strategically aimed at chemical sites as well. Hence the missile threat is diverse. In the case of the EMP weapon system, we need to look at Iran's missiles capability also from the perspective of delivering a blow, not just to Israel or US and Western targets in the region, but also across large bodies of water.

    Geopolitical projections, including developments which may take place in Iraq and Afghanistan, tell us that Iran may find itself free from constraints to equip itself with long range missiles able to reach US mainland at some point in the near future, not only from mainland Iran, but also from other locations closer to America, including at the hands of terrorist forces.

    As a result of these geopolitical consideration I believe it is pressing for the defense and counter terrorism community to increase the level of efforts in this emerging field of threat and begin a public awareness campaign to educate citizens in this regard.

    **************

    Dr Walid Phares is the Director of Future Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. He is the author of The Confrontation: Winning the War against Future Jihad
     
  16. Su-47

    Su-47 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    18
    If India wants to avoid getting nuked, we have to take out pak nukes, and for that, we need to dump the 'no first use' policy.

    A quick and decisive first strike will catch them by surprise, and with some luck, take out most of the top command and the 'nuclear generals' who have the launch codes. That will buy us the time needed to find and remove the nukes, IF we are prepared for a wholescale assault.

    EMP effect can be produced by a nuke. If we nuke pak first, with a lot of nukes, most of their land-based nuclear systems will be destroyed, either by EMP or by the blast itself. Pak's second strike capability is not very good, mainly due to lack of sophisticated missiles, lack of a sea-based deterrent and inability to achieve air superiority to deliver nukes via aircraft deep into India.

    If we take out most of their nukes, we'll have a fighting chance to avoid a nuking all together. Since our initial nuking will take out most of their military, it will be easy for our troops to advance rapidly into pak. If we get air supremacy, Pak can't nuke with aircraft. If we can prevent Pak jets, especially F-16s from reaching the altitude necessary to fire the ra'ad air launched cruise missile, it will be a major blow to their second strike capability.

    A quick and decisive first strike will catch them by surprise, and with some luck, take out most of the top command and the 'nuclear generals' who have the launch codes. Also if we gain air supremacy and have Phalcons flying over Pak territory, we can detect any missile about to be launched from underground bunkers as the missile is setting up for launch, and take it out. Then the only real threat will be the missiles that go undetected, and those will be few and hopefully can be taken out if we get enough ABMs to our border regions.

    But the real threat will be the babur missile. Its a cruise missile, and can be launched faster than a ballistic missile, and is harder to detect or intercept. Hopefully pak won't have integrated nukes on the babur, but we can't rely on that, so we'll have a real job on our hands to prevent the launch of babur. But if we can avoid a babur launch, we can actually take out Pak's nukes without getting attacked ourselves.

    The biggest problem is of course, the casuality figures, and the ethics behind this operation. This operation will require a complete shunning of all human ethics, and the willingness to bear world condemnation. It will be a genocide and a crime against humanity, since millions will be killed by the initial nuking, but all the same, this is the only way i see to take out Pak's nukes.

    This is just a VERY extreme scenario. I am not suggesting this operation.
     
  17. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,553
    Likes Received:
    6,564
    i agree SU-47 the no first use policy makes no sense, striking hard and fast first once our BMD is up would limit collateral damage and finish pakistan, there is also no point to diplomacy since pakistan has every intention of using their nukes against India. Babur missile would require a minitarized nuke which i don't thin pakistan has yet?? Pakistan has threatened nukes use in conventional war to water sharing issues so we should prepare for this scenario.
     
  18. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    Nukes can be easily hidden though. The pesky ones hiding in Potato trucks, ocean barges and container ships will be the ones used for second strike. Not to mention all the underground nuclear bunkers the Pakistanis seem to be building. Missiles will be stockpiled too. So, they don't have problems with delivery.

    If we really want to target the nukes without being nuked, it has to be through diplomacy or build an impenetrable missile defence shield. We will have to learn to live with nukes until they are banned internationally or become obsolete(only to be replaced by a new weapon). I don't see any of this happening in the recent future.
     
  19. Su-47

    Su-47 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    18
    Pakistani soldiers can be bought with money. This was a critical weakness of pak that US reports highlighted. there maybe disconcerted Pakistani officials who maybe willing to sell the location of their nukes. if RAW can do its job well, it might be able to track some of these nukes. If RAW sends double agents pretending to be sympathisers of radical islamists, they might encounter some success.
     
  20. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    If they are threatened with nuclear war, I doubt they will be so cooperative. The will obviously need a country to spend the money in.

    Well, they could be made citizens of India or run away to ME.

    I doubt the Pakistanis will let people with dodgy profiles gain control over the nukes. They will be hand picked by the top brass.
     
  21. johnee

    johnee Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,474
    Likes Received:
    467
    You are over-estimating Pakistan and its top brass. Su is right, PA could be bought, infact, I believe most of the Paks can be bought especially if the buyer can project himself as a 'better muslim' and working for 'Islamic good'. It is noticed that Paks identify themselves as muslims and not as Pakistanis. They are not really very loyal to their nation and wouldnt mind going against its interests if they get the right price for it.
     

Share This Page