Is Saudi Arabia a nuclear weapon state now?

[al-Hasani]

1. Agreed. Though I might wish for sake of all involved for this process to be based on empowering a willing union and not annexation by KSA.

2. Citizens of KSA are certainly not all Najdis. But Aal-Saud are Najdis. Their capital Riyadh is in Najd. I hope that clarifies what I have been trying to convey. This ties back to point #1 above.

The reference to undignified names was meant to communicate that I do not take offence at difference of opinion unlike many on this forum. It was not directed at you, but was in fact included to put you at ease. Unfortunately, I have seen some Pakistani members exhibit bad manners with you, which you do not tolerate. That is all.

3. Agreed.

4. Agreed.

5. I see nationalism, culture, custom, language, tribal affiliation, etc... as means to an end - Identity. But the highest identity, in my view, is being a human creation of Allah.

Not saying anything about you, but I see various attitudes on this forum relating to identity. Practicality is one thing, preference is another, prejudice is still another, and the worst is racism and assumption of superiority.

1) When I write "annexed" this is bound in an inside joke on the forum where I once wrote that I wanted to see Qatar getting annexed when they were causing troubles. That was said as a joke more than anything else and then I have carried that joke over a few times. So basically this means a closer cooperation in my PDF vocabulary.

2) Yes, they are but most of the population are not. People from Najd come from all backgrounds inside KSA and outside of it (Arabian Peninsula and the Arab world and non-Arab world). It has historically, contrary to some beliefs, been a place of migrations and constant transit. This has also had an impact on the population. But yes you are right. The Al-Saud are certainly a Najdi family with very old ties to Najd.

Well, fair enough. I stopped taking the forum too seriously long ago so occasionally I have my trolling and I am always direct in my messages. For good and bad.
5) Agreed. I just want to discuss such issues more than at any other time due to the unfortunate events of the region.

I also agree that there can be a thin line between being proud of something whether it is "your" people (s) your region's history, family history, personal achievements (education, wealth, looks, intelligence etc.) and that of arrogance, superiority and racism. 90% of what I write on those issues should not be taken for more than what it is. Often it is a tactic to counter trolls. On more rare occasions it is part of interesting political, historical etc. debates. But they are rare and far between. Unfortunately.

 

[The SC]

You are making the mistake of taking seriously some random floating conjectures. Whoever said that these theories merit any attention to begin with?



1. I find serious problem with your world-view in that you see world through a specific interpretation of 'Saudi Arab Nationalism". Must it be expansionist and militant in the extreme on the back of size and hypothetical population?

2. When you say that "Sooner rather than later KSA must annex all other countries on the Arabian Peninsula" you are proving the case of UAE. As I recall one of the reasons UAE came into being was out of fear of annexation by the expansionist Saudis. What makes you think that Omanis, Emiratis, Qataris, Kuwaitis would put up with annexation at all? You are preaching expansionism at the expense of other nationalities and using your version of "Saudi Arab Nationalism" as vehicle of choice.

3. You then launch an exposition of Arab greatness based on X number of Arab empires which are more than among Y number of Ethnic groups. Your supposed imperial heritage does nothing to impress others who happen to read your post. It only betrays a mind-set of supposed Arab superiority based on effort of long-lost ancestors who were actually a very different people from likes of you.

I do not wish to belittle your Arab pride, but please use some boundaries, otherwise you sound so very jingoistic and Ethno-centric.

Sorry to hurt your ego, but brother you really need some advise.

I'll try to better the discussion here.
The annexation should read, a voluntary union, like what is happening now, there was an Arab-Muslim greatness with no doubt about it, history is a good withness to that fact.
Arabs do not have a sense of superiority, otherwise during all the periods of Islam they would not have intermingled with so many other cultures, and help raise other cultures to the point of governing them. This is a complete opposite to racism and feelings of superiority.

SA has a nuclear umbrella, and that is a certainty, and it has a right to it.
Most NATO nations have the US nuclear umbrella, whether the weapons as shelved there or ready to be shipped to them., So why not KSA?
Pakistan should have enough nuclear bombs to protect all other Muslim countries that can not afford them or are not allowed to make them, mostly as a deterrent.

 

[Militant Atheist]

Probably. But I personally wouldn't want anyone in this ****ed up region to have a nuclear bomb (including Iran).

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

The DF-3 has a range of 2,650 km and carries a payload of 2,150 kg. It is equipped with a single nuclear warhead with a 1-3 MT yield.

Well, 3 megatons in one warhead is enormous.

That is 3000 kilotons. In comparison, the bomb used on Hiroshima had a blast yield of only 16 kilotons.

4. By showing off their ageing Chinese missiles, the Saudis intimated that they had acquired the more advanced generation of this weapon, which they are keeping under wraps. debkafile’s intelligence sources report that in recent visits to Beijing, high-ranking Saudi officials negotiated the purchase of Dong-Feng 21 (DF-21), whose range is shorter, 1,700 km, but more precise and effective in view of its terminal radar guidance system. The West has no information about when the new Chinese missiles were delivered to Saudi Arabia.

The DF-21 is a far superior platform.

This platform has been modified to be used as an anti-satellite weapon, and the DF-21D variant is the world's very first ASBM (Anti-ship ballistic missile), dubbed the "carrier killer".

 

[The SC]

Well, 3 megatons in one warhead is enormous.

That is 3000 kilotons. In comparison, the bomb used on Hiroshima had a blast yield of only 16 kilotons.



The DF-21 is a far superior platform.

This platform has been modified to be used as an anti-satellite weapon, and the DF-21D variant is the world's very first ASBM (Anti-ship ballistic missile), dubbed the "carrier killer".

It must be a thermonuclear warhead or a hydrogen bomb, with that yield of 1 to 3 Mt, it should be a great deterrent even to Usrael with its supposed 200 to 400 nuclear warheads, meaning they can use a lot of theirs but we can have a more devastating counterattack in one or a few blows.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

It must be a thermonuclear warhead or a hydrogen one, with that yield of 1 to 3 Mt, it should be a great detterent even to Usrael with its supposed 200 to 400 nuclear warheads, meaning you can use a lot of yours but we can have a devastating couterattack in one blow.

If Saudi has acquired the DF-21 like the source says, they won't need such a high blast yield, due to the much better accuracy of the modern platform.

Three megatons would not be necessary in that scenario, though I guess it never hurts to have a bigger bomb.

DF-21 is also believed to be able to carry multiple warheads, up to 6 for each missile.

 

[The SC]

If Saudi has acquired the DF-21 like the source says, they won't need such a high blast yield, due to the much better accuracy of the modern platform.

Three megatons would not be necessary in that scenario, though I guess it never hurts to have a bigger bomb.

DF-21 is also believed to be able to carry multiple warheads, up to 6 for each missile.

That is another option to add to the first one, anyhow, it is all for deterrence, and some peace of mind.

 

[Zarvan]

If it ever came out that Pakistan gave Saudis nukes Pakistan would be invaded with UN approval to disarm it. That is why I doubt Pakistan will ever do something so drastic however a nuclear umbrella has probably been in place for a long time.

Do you seriously think that will not happen or that is not going on

 

[Secur]

Pakistani high command hasn't gone insane to start delivering nuclear weapons to other countries , those wishing for it or arguing that it has already happened are living in fool's paradise , the repercussions will be huge and this country will be put in solitary confinement for a very very long time at the very least . A nuclear umbrella is your best bet and even that is a big IF .

 

[Hyperion]

We haven't signed NPT. Though, I do agree with the rest.

If it ever came out that Pakistan gave Saudis nukes Pakistan would be invaded with UN approval to disarm it. That is why I doubt Pakistan will ever do something so drastic however a nuclear umbrella has probably been in place for a long time.

 

[Jaanbaz]

Pakistani high command hasn't gone insane to start delivering nuclear weapons to other countries , those wishing for it or arguing that it has already happened are living in fool's paradise , the repercussions will be huge and this country will be put in solitary confinement for a very very long time at the very least . A nuclear umbrella is your best bet and even that is a big IF .

Do you honestly have doubt on the stupidity of Pakistani leadership?

 

[Kompromat]

@Jaanbaz l We are not THAT stupid to engage in nuclear trade.

KSA can have 'protection' from Pakistan provided it agrees to become a 'real' partner. If we are going to fight their wars, they'd have to fight ours. This is how nation states function.

 

[Secur]

Do you honestly have doubt on the stupidity of Pakistani leadership?

No , of course not . Its just that at the level where those decisions are made , there indeed is rationality .

 

[Jaanbaz]

No , of course not . Its just that at the level where those decisions are made , there indeed is rationality .

If there wasn't then Saudis will all ready be parading with nukes at the back of camels.

@Jaanbaz l We are not THAT stupid to engage in nuclear trade.

KSA can have 'protection' from Pakistan provided it agrees to become a 'real' partner. If we are going to fight their wars, they'd have to fight ours. This is how nation states function.

I have no problem Pakistan being a partner, but I want equal status for Pakistan. Many times it seems we are not their equal but their slaves.

 

[PoKeMon]

Yes.

Any country that thinks of harming our Arab brothers will have to watch out for us. Everybody knows it and that is why nobody will think of attempting any such thing.

Is that nuclear umbrella is valid against nuclear nation as well?

I mean what the heck you will do if some European nation chose to nuke SA? Putting you nuke in a F-16, refueling it multiple times(not sure how), breaching the SAM,s and air defence, do a suicide hit?

And then get ready to watch hundreds of Trident looming over Pakistan?

I dont think you are in a position to guarantee security to any nation.