Pak nukes can fall into terrorists' hands: IAEA chief

[IceCold]

I think it is part of a big plan by U.S. to force Pak to allow U.S. forces to operate inside swat areas to destroy Taliban stronghold.Also i read somewhere that pentagon has submitted report seeking Prez. Obama permission to operate in Swat.

Yeah and that somewhere was probably on BR or perhaps the times or the Hindu.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The same old statements that were made 2 years ago after the Lal Masjid and the same old BS about US planning to invade Pakistan.

It didn't happen then and it likely isn't happening now.

Baradei's comments are unwarranted however - Pakistan's nuclear controls (there is a stick in the WMD section if someone wants to read about them) are highly sophisticated and comprehensive - considered by many analysts to be far more advanced than India's.

The ONLY way terrorists woudl get their hands on Pakistani nukes is if they overthrew the GoP and the military and controlled the entire country - not happening any time soon.

 

[srijeesh]

btw, did GOP issue any statement about IAEA chief's latest observation?

 

[Jihad]

btw, did GOP issue any statement about IAEA chief's latest observation?

I don't know, it seems as if our government is refraining from commenting on any of these useless statements made by outsiders.
Is it a smart thing to do? Perhaps..
A quiet and more silent stance has its benefits, or perhaps giving them a few good words back would be better? Anyway, I don't know, my choice would be to lash back at those who seriously think Pakistani Nukes can ever fall into the wrong hands.

This is simply a part of trying to destabalize Pakistan, the U.S. is guilty of doing this by spreading these statements, it's all a part of trying to undermine Pakistans sovereignty and credibility.
Completely useless.

 

[zombie]

Dude you people are so ******* ignorant that its not even funny.Go read in WMD section how our nukes are secured and how will Taliban sympathizer get the nuke.There are way too many checks in place for one person to get nukes.It is only possible if General Kiyani decides to give nukes to Taliban which is not going to happen anyway..

apart from using abuses as responses you seem to be have a comprehension problem. The post was in response to your statement where you said only 2 people know where the nukes are which cannot be true.

 

[Jihad]

apart from using abuses as responses you seem to be have a comprehension problem. The post was in response to your statement where you said only 2 people know where the nukes are which cannot be true.

Try and do some research on Pakistan and its nuclear assets, try and "comprehend" that before you start lecturing others.
Saadahmed is one of the many Pakistanis who is sick of all the people and especially Indians saying how unsafe Pakistani nukes are, without even KNOWING how Nukes actually work and how they are kept safe and protected from anyone without the legislation to acces them.
You watch way too many movies, seriously, Bollywood ain't good for your brains.

 

[araz]

Araz sb like you said in your previous post, they don't listen because they don't want too. So what better way would it then be to make them listen if not this. As for the softly approach that you mentioned, i say i will have to disagree with you on that one, reason is that this isn't the first time they have come up with this crap you know that, its being happening from Musharraf's era and has continued so far and will continue so in the near future, maybe even more forcefully, so in the end i don't see us going anywhere with the soft approach. "Latoon ka bhoot batoon sa nahi manta"
So they don't want to listen, we will make them listen, since they didn't liked the soft approach, its high time we give them a hard one.

The problem is that you dont have enough clout internationally to make your self heard. So the softly approach works bcause it seems to the world that rather than to hit you they need to strengthen you. We need to highlght that in tough circumstances we are doing a tough and competant job.We should be helped. We must reiterate that the Afghan problem is not of our own doing and blame unce Sam for it. We should have no hesitation in brining the slain leader Bull crap into it. Kep repeating it and it will work. The way I see it you dont stand to loose anything. This is media war and we need to play this gae wisely otherwise, the results could be bad for us.
WaSalam
Araz

 

[srijeesh]

The problem is that you dont have enough clout internationally to make your self heard. So the softly approach works bcause it seems to the world that rather than to hit you they need to strengthen you. We need to highlght that in tough circumstances we are doing a tough and competant job.We should be helped. We must reiterate that the Afghan problem is not of our own doing and blame unce Sam for it. We should have no hesitation in brining the slain leader Bull crap into it. Kep repeating it and it will work. The way I see it you dont stand to loose anything. This is media war and we need to play this gae wisely otherwise, the results could be bad for us.
WaSalam
Araz

actually, a very good ploy. and pakistan has followed this diligently till now with great success in bush era. but obama seems to have seen through this plan. any new ideas?

 

[blain2]

I think his concerns are somewhat valid.Pakistan Government should ensure they have 100% control of Pakistan Territory.

Nobody has 100% control over their territory. However Pakistan has 100% control over her nuclear assets. This is the reality.

 

[blain2]

actually, a very good ploy. and pakistan has followed this diligently till now with great success in bush era. but obama seems to have seen through this plan. any new ideas?

You do not know what Obama has seen through because his policy with regards to Pakistan is still be worked out. My own take is that Pakistanis will be pleasantly surprised by the Obama policies (not saying that irritants wont be there, however beyond the rhetoric, there will be some pretty good cooperation and support).

 

[srijeesh]

Nobody has 100% control over their territory. However Pakistan has 100% control over her nuclear assets. That is the reality.

what?

 

[srijeesh]

You do not know what Obama has seen through because his policy with regards to Pakistan is still be worked out. My own take is that Pakistanis will be pleasantly surprised by the Obama policies (not saying that irritants wont be there, however beyond the rhetoric, there will be some pretty good cooperation and support).

but the indication till now have anything but pleasant for pakistan. drone attacks continue. special envoy only to pakistan and afghanistan. aid based on performance. wat pleasant did you see?

 

[blain2]

but the indication till now have anything but pleasant for pakistan. drone attacks continue. special envoy only to pakistan and afghanistan. aid based on performance. wat pleasant did you see?

Drone attacks have been ongoing. Nothing new. Anyone expecting them to stop upon him taking up office is not living in reality.

Special Envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan is actually a good thing for Pakistan. It means that we work with someone fairly closely and can clearly explain to the envoy what our security, geo-political considerations are. This means that Obama gets a more accurate analysis of what we are trying to do instead of someone sitting in DC, all aloof from Pakistan making the calls on Pakistan policy. Remember talking is always good. The more we talk, the more we tell them about the genesis of the militancy problem and its relation to the Kashmir issue, the more objective a US response we will see.

Performance based aid is just what is being talked about. There is a precedence in place that it does not work. However Americans are not the only ones with leverage on this issue. Pakistan can and will respond appropriately if conditionalities are placed. What all that is going on in Kyrgyzstan with the base closure, Pakistan's importance in the war in Afghanistan is bound to increase. So placing measures such as the old pressler amendment (at the behest of the Indian lobby) will be counter-productive for the US interests.

All in all, I say things are ok if one looks at them pragmatically.

 

[blain2]

what?

What is so hard to understand here?

 

[SSGPA1]

Pak nukes can fall into terrorists' hands: IAEA chief ...

“Aircrafts carrying nuclear warheads passed over the US several times but nobody could detect them,” he said.

This gentleman is following the line from the White House. Obama is looking to improve relations with Iran so here is the first step that Iran is not capable of nuclear weapons.

Pakistan has close to 700K strong armed forces but it has an issue with the security of its nuclar weapons.

What is Zardari saying in response? nothing

What is Nawaz Sharif saying in response? nothing,he is too busy finding a genuine political issue.

I hope the Gen. Musharraf would say something in response to this charge.