How PAF Prevented an Israeli Attack on Pakistan's Nuclear Assets

[somebozo]

Please keep your smart alec remarks to yourself, bring proofs to your claims. I suggest you read up on history and look at deputations carried out within timeframes to these countries.

Well i know PAF was flying missions out of Syria using Syrian airforce aircrafts..and downed two israeli jets..but things sour up fast as Pakistan entered the Afghan theater..as Syria was a Soviet ally..and Saddam made the famous speech in Delhi supporting Indian stance on Kashmir...

 

[SQ8]

Well i know PAF was flying missions out of Syria using Syrian airforce aircrafts..and downed two israeli jets..but things sour up fast as Pakistan entered the Afghan theater..as Syria was a Soviet ally..and Saddam made the famous speech in Delhi supporting Indian stance on Kashmir...

Thank you for summing up history in that simplistic and ignorant manner. The relations soured between Iraq and Pakistan prior to the Afghan war if you actualy read up on history. This began with the recognition of BD (infact, multiple Arab nations did so and it led to a souring of relations), after which at NO point was the Afghan war the problem between Iraq and Pakistan; it was Iraq trying to subvert Iran and Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia because our military resources were directly stationed there and Iran because of Iraqi intelligence activities inside Pakistan.

Coming to Syria, at no point besides a brief period in the early 80's were relations bad between Pakistan and Syria. Pakistani instructors went to Syria routinely and their students came here. Syria was one option, I never mentioned Iraq.

 

[Drashid]

Contains live footage.
Besides, this confirmed to have TAKEN action.
Proving that something "would've" happened and didn't, is alot harder without official documentary

I'm curious, as an Israeli, do you support these ops that bomb Arab nations trying to make nukes?

 

[Natan]

I'm curious, as an Israeli, do you support these ops that bomb Arab nations trying to make nukes?

Vast majority of Israelis support these operation, but we are talking about Iraqi and Syrian nuclear projects that we were glad to destroy.
It doesn't mean that if Egypt, Jordan, or even Saudi Arabia and UAE would ever run their own nuclear projects, Israel vows to bomb them too. Not every Arab nation is as hostile towards Israel as Iraq and Syria, and vice versa.

 

[Drashid]

Vast majority of Israelis support these operation, but we are talking about Iraqi and Syrian nuclear projects that we were glad to destroy.
It doesn't mean that if Egypt, Jordan, or even Saudi Arabia and UAE would ever run their own nuclear projects, Israel vows to bomb them too. Not every Arab nation is as hostile towards Israel as Iraq and Syria, and vice versa.

I can understand bombing Iraq, Saddam couldn't be trusted with nukes, but why Syria? They pose no threat to Israel, bombing them is just playing bully.

 

[DavidSling]

I'm curious, as an Israeli, do you support these ops that bomb Arab nations trying to make nukes?

As an Israeli, I support any action that is beneficial for my country's future

I can understand bombing Iraq, Saddam couldn't be trusted with nukes, but why Syria? They pose no threat to Israel, bombing them is just playing bully.

Srsly? Almost every major in the past included syria + supplying weapons to our enemies

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

...

The Iran-Iraq was from 1980-1988.
There is no way Pakistan or Israel would fly anywhere near the Persian Gulf unless they wanted to get shot down by not only them but also the US Fleet in the Persian Gulf protecting oil tankers.

Israel would probably get access to in flight refueling to fly south of Saudi Arabia and over the Indian Ocean and then due a North turn when below Pakistan.

Flying through that area was not worth the risk or potential political fallout.

 

[HAIDER]

Vast majority of Israelis support these operation, but we are talking about Iraqi and Syrian nuclear projects that we were glad to destroy.
It doesn't mean that if Egypt, Jordan, or even Saudi Arabia and UAE would ever run their own nuclear projects, Israel vows to bomb them too. Not every Arab nation is as hostile towards Israel as Iraq and Syria, and vice versa.

There projects are power generation not worth bombing. Plus, they are building under strict rules of NPT and NSG. Operated by western engineers. Offshore operation.

 

[Natan]

I can understand bombing Iraq, Saddam couldn't be trusted with nukes, but why Syria? They pose no threat to Israel, bombing them is just playing bully.

In 2007, one year after 2006 Lebanon War, four years before Syrian civil war, it was perfectly reasonable for Israel to prevent Assad from having nukes. Assad was on Hezbullah side, Assad provided them weapons, namely ATGMs we've captured in Lebanon. With 'scuds' and chemical weapons Assad was as much dangerous as Saddam. He repeated his claims for the Golan heights over and over again. If you understand why we bombed Iraq, then, well, we bombed Assad for the same reason. He couldn't be trusted with nukes.

There projects are power generation not worth bombing. Plus, they are under strict rules of NPT and NSG.

That's right, but let's say even if Egypt goes for nuclear weapons. Are we going to bomb Egypt for that? Nahh.. We have peace agreement and we are not going to violate it unless they violate it.

 

[HAIDER]

In 2007, one year after 2006 Lebanon War, four years before Syrian civil war, it was perfectly reasonable for Israel to prevent Assad from having nukes. Assad was on Hezbullah side, Assad provided them weapons, namely ATGMs we've captured in Lebanon. With 'scuds' and chemical weapons Assad was as much dangerous as Saddam. He repeated his claims for the Golan heights over and over again. If you understand why we bombed Iraq, then, well, we bombed Assad for the same reason. He couldn't be trusted with nukes.


That's right, but let's say even if Egypt goes for nuclear weapons. Are we going to bomb Egypt for that? Nahh.. We have peace agreement and we are not going to violate it unless they violate it.

Well, remember Egypt is not democracy. And dictatorship sometime tilt over night. No if and buts, security comes first. And you govt pretty much aware about the ground reality of your next door neighbor .

 

[war&peace]

There is an acute difference between maintaining air superiority and carrying out a surprise surgical strike.
You are also forgetting that in the 80s, PAF was very much present in Middle East, in fact it was in the mid-80s, Colonel Qaddafi asked PAF personal on secondment to Libya, to attack the US Task force which was menacing the Libyan coast.

PAF has been flying in Syrian and Jordinian skies too...that's as close to Israel as one can get..

 

[Natan]

Well, remember Egypt is not democracy. And dictatorship sometime tilt over night. No if and buts, security comes first. And you govt pretty much aware about the ground reality of your next door neighbor .

Yes, but we've never bombed 'friendly dictators' so far. We only bomb hostile ones.

 

[HAIDER]

Yes, but we've never bombed 'friendly dictators' so far. We only bomb hostile ones.

LOLzzz.....lolzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz that's funny......but must have Plan B somewhere in secret vault.

 

[PDF]

Are you sure you want me to tell you the truth? 99% of humans get pissed off when they hear the truth. The truth is, there were three times in each civilian government's previous tiny cycle, where this issue came close to a civil resolution (meaning without a war). And it was on equal terms as India wasn't as powerful as it is today. Now, the Pakistani military even knows the massive imbalance that exists between the two nations and its growing by every month and at a very fast race!

India, just last month signed more deals than the entire defense budget of Pakistan for an entire year. So you've lost that "equality" that was there 20 years ago. Now, more than likely, Kashmir will be settled on terms of "as-is" meaning the current boundaries will become permanent. Macho talk is all different, but simply put (militarily), Pakistan has no offensive means to "get Kashmir" anymore. Does that tell you where the Kashmir situation is? Reality is a bi**h and the sooner you wake up to it, the better it is.

Please tell during which civilians government it occurred? Also tell me the end result... Oh massive imbalance you say... Please continue. I am sure Pakistan is on its knees to India due to the imbalance.

Let India purchase whatever it does. You do realize that Pakistan has the deterrence created by them due to those purchases. Regarding Kashmir, Pakistan does not even need to use its military. The oppression has caused local to rebel and security wise, Indian cannot control IOK... Maybe you need to live in the reality. I am well awake but I am not sure about you...

What support..? Pakistani Civil and Military leaders are now constantly asking the US to help put a line in the sand as Pakistan needs to focus on her economy and it has no ability to even come close to a continued arms race in this region. You can't ever get offensive with $ 8-10 billion defense budget compared to a $ 50-75 billion defense budget with 3:1 odds in India's favor.

We defended ourselves in 1965 when the odds were 5:1 or more. We can protect ourselves very well. Why should we go offensive?

Similarly, what "support" for the Palestinians? What is it that Pakistan has done that was so great for the Palestinians beyond talking points? The best thing for the Palestinians is if like Turkey, Pakistan became Israel's friend and pursued her towards establishing a two state solution and helped in that process. In both scenarios above, only fools can think about anything but diplomatic option.

We have supported them at UN and will continue to do so.

IMO, Pakistan has a huge talent base, and Israel can help in pushing that talent base to a better use through offering technology and other stuff. Remember, Israel is all about business and establishing ties with Muslim countries. And like Israel, Pakistan is also a nuke power in the Muslim world (and the only one). So two can join hands and do a lot of good for the world.

I am glad you said that. When General Musharraff went to his one of the first mainstream tours to the US, who did he address? And spent about 80% of the time with? The American Jewish community and in his words "he was honored to address the "distinguished" American Jewish community" (I witnessed this statement). Now this was the Army Chief of Pakistan and the President

You do realize he was one of the dictators whom you critize. Funny, He was the reason TTP i.e terrorism begun in our country...

Okay more discussion after Fajr Prayer. Got to go!

 

[Drashid]

In 2007, one year after 2006 Lebanon War, four years before Syrian civil war, it was perfectly reasonable for Israel to prevent Assad from having nukes. Assad was on Hezbullah side, Assad provided them weapons, namely ATGMs we've captured in Lebanon. With 'scuds' and chemical weapons Assad was as much dangerous as Saddam. He repeated his claims for the Golan heights over and over again. If you understand why we bombed Iraq, then, well, we bombed Assad for the same reason. He couldn't be trusted with nukes.

The difference between Saddam and Assad was that Saddam controlled a powerful and well equipped military, where as Assad did not. All Syria could ever do was make claims, if they tried to act upon them they would be crushed. Even if they made nukes they would still pose very little danger. Assad having nukes would just make it harder for Israel to meddle in Syrian affairs.

As an Israeli, I support any action that is beneficial for my country's future


Srsly? Almost every major in the past included syria + supplying weapons to our enemies

And how many wars did Syria even come close to beating Israel in? Zero. Just because they help your enemies does not mean you can stop them from being able to defend themselves. Besides, they have never been powerful to begin with.