Posted on 12/26/2004 6:35:58 PM PST by Saberwielder
The ISI was completely controlled by them prior to 9/11, and certainly the population was becoming even more extremist thanks largely to the Saudi-funded madrassas.
It is impossible to change all this overnight, but Musharraf has made progress far beyond my expectations. He's survived assassination attempts while conducting purges of the ISI and the army. He's defused tensions in Kashmir and conducted sweeps of the unconquered tribal areas.
He's done everything we've asked at great personal and political peril.
Some would like him to wave a magic wand and turn Pakistan into some sort of nirvana. But the truth is that Pakistan is a far better ally than Turkey and far more helpful in the war on terrorists than our neighbors to the north.
I don't like contributing to your ongoing efforts to sow discord and to undermine support for the Administration's strategy in Pakistan, by adding any post that would bump your thread, but I couldn't leave that foolish statement of yours go unanswered.
Gee. I didn't realize that President Bush appointed you as the Secretary of Amity and I also did not realize that we all have a calling to ignore any news that don't fit the administration's strategy on Pakistan. I'll keep that in mind next time, Mr. Secretary.
Contrary to what you state, the only Pakistani access to nuclear weapons is held by the Military's top leadership
Wow. I see that as a member of the Bush cabinet you have access to top secret material like who has access to Pakistan's nuke warheads. It must have slipped your mind that the people guarding the bunkers, silos and other facilities that house the warheads and weapons grade Uranium are not the Generals but lower level officers and enlisted men. You don't see Pakistani generals doing sentry duty, do you?
So, you're against protecting those nukes from Islamists? Go figure
So you now have the power to read other people's minds? Where did I say that?
Oh, that's right, you've got an agenda you're trying to sell.
ROTFL. And you're here without any agenda?
If you read the report carefully, you'd see that it talks about many Pakistani soldiers participating in training activities with terrorists in training camps that are still open. So why are those facilities still open? Secondly, you'd do well to read about the events in Iran before the Islamic revolution.
I don't think you'll find too many people surprised to hear about this. What is encouraging is the steps being taken to root out this problem. Pakistan has come a long way in the past three years, but there are obviously still many problems.
One of many foreign policy successes by the Bush Administration that is rarely if ever mentioned. I imagine Sec. Powell had some long, anxious nights back then.
Your title was suspect enough, but I'd say your sarcastic response has effectively proven Boot's point. While I strongly disagree that this news is not part of the Administration's strategy in Pakistan, you obviously felt that it was and scrambled to get it posted.
But regardless of your motivation, it is an interesting article, and I'm glad to have read it.
It was more than suspect, it was outright fraud. When Saberwielder first posted this thread, he did so without the brackets in the title. AM had to add that correction.
--Boot Hill
| 8 | Saberwielder in December: “It must have slipped your mind that the people guarding the [nuclear] bunkers, silos and other facilities that house the warheads and weapons grade Uranium are not the Generals but lower level officers and enlisted men. You don't see Pakistani generals doing sentry duty, do you?” (source) |
| 8 | Saberwielder in October: “NBC did a piece that talked about U.S having installed PALs [Permissive Action Link] on Pakistani nukes. You think people went to prison for that information coming out?” (source) |
LOL, so Saberwielder, it appears that you are now saying that the PAL's that control the nukes are in the hands of "lower level officers and enlisted men", and not the top generals. After all, wasn't it you who said: "These guys [the lower level officers and enlisted men] hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads!"
--Boot Hill
What I find alarming is the drip-by-drip nature of these revelations.
Ever since 9/11, Musharraf had been parroting the claim that Pakistan's army is highly disciplined and the nukes were safe, etc. Earlier in 2004, after reports on the attempts on his life came out, Musharraf said: "there was involvement by some few lower-level people but there were no officers involved" But reports from Waziristan clearly said that even a Colonel rebelled.
After the Colonel level, how long before you hear of Brigadiers? And Lieutenant Generals?
Now, we can all ignore these types of events and pretend that the Bush administration is always right like some people would like to believe. Or, we can discuss the very real ramifications of the very serious happenings in Pakistan, even if it may cast doubts on our current policy of - "Musharraf can do no wrong."
There are fundamental problems with Pakistan. They can only be fixed through fundamental reforms - starting with a gradual return to civilian rule, a move away from using Islamist extremism as state tools and structural changes to the power structure. Musharraf clearly wants to enjoy the benefits of allying with us but has been using our fear of an alternative to avoid making any meaningful change to his country i.e give up power to elected rulers. The danger here is not of an imminent coup, but a slow build up of resentment where Musharraf's refusal to allow legitmate dissent causes opponents of army rule in Pakistan to find that supporting the jihadists is their only way out. There are no societal pressure release valves in a one man dictatorship.
I urge you to look up material on the last years of the Shah of Iran and see the similarities in the arguments. Just replace Pehlavi with Pervez. The Islamic revolution happened in Iran when even the secular opponents of the Shah felt so mad at the blind American support to the Shah's misrule that they lent a helping hand to Khomeini and his thugs. History is to be learnt from.
My guess is that if we have that kind of access to these devices, that Pakistan's entire nuclear stockpile probably rests in the read end of a U.S. C-130, fueled up and with a fresh crew on board, sitting at the end of some Pakistani runway, along with a flight of fighter escorts, awaiting a "go code" from intel telling us that the worst has happened and Musharraf has fallen and to get those damn nukes the hell out of Dodge NOW!!!.Is this a risky plan? Heck yes, but I see no other choice that has less risk. Besides, its working (for now, at least!)
Now, by your logic, as stated in post #27, once PAL's are in place on Pakistan's warheads, the US has nothing to worry about. There are many keys to a given nuclear weapon. If having a PAL was enough, we wouldn't be spending billions to guard and disarm Russia's many warheads (Nunn-Lugar initiative), would we?
Those who aren't blinded by a desire to avoid bad news can think of stuff like many pounds of highly enriched uranium that reside inside Pakistan's warheads as well as triggering devices that could be used to construct a "dirty" bomb is a serious enough threat.
And not to mention that there are many steps before a nuclear weapon is made and there are other key sites such as the ones storing radioactive material - which Pakistan should have by the proverbial ton - all guarded by these types of guys.
Or did a little birdie tell you that we have the all the Pakistani HE Uranium extracted and sitting at the back of USAF C-130s in Dalbandin? LOL.
And finally, about the title of this thread - When the report says "hundreds or even thousands" of Pakistani troops could be rebelling against authority, it is reasonable to think of the word mutiny. If it quacks like a duck...
Sorry, but you only rate a D+ for that effort to wriggle out of the conundrum you've talked your way into. You started this thread with the wildly stupid notion that "lower level officers and enlisted men" actually "hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads". Where's your proof for that reckless charge? Obviously, the actual keys to the Pakistani nukes are held by the general staff that prosecuted these miscreants. Only an idiot would believe otherwise.
Once again you've come to the Free Republic forum to try to sow your seeds of dissent by whipping up fear and loathing against Musharraf, Pakistan and U.S. foreign policy, with another blatantly false charge for which neither you, nor the story, offered even one iota of proof. You are dishonest.
• "...it is reasonable to think of the word mutiny."
But that's not what you did, is it? You didn't just think the word "mutiny", rather you willfully chose to commit a fraud upon the forum by falsely changing the title to lead off with "Mutiny in the Pakistan army", when you knew perfectly well that no such word or phrase could be found in the actual title or body of the story. You are dishonest.
Take your irrational anti-Pakistan bias and paranoia somewhere else.
--Boot Hill
Candy Gram to Boot Hill -> When you hit the bottom, stop digging.
You conveniently ignore the fact that the US government and law enforcement have explicitly stated their worries not just about nuclear warheads, but nuclear fuel being used in dirty bombs. Do you have any proof that the Pakistani Generals control all their country's nuclear fuel? You obviously don't.
Secondly, why don't you show us the proof for your claim that Pakistan's nuclear warheads are sitting at the back of a US C-130? Cat got your tongue?
Once again you've come to the Free Republic forum to try to sow your seeds of dissent by whipping up fear and loathing against Musharraf, Pakistan and U.S. foreign policy, with another blatantly false charge for which neither you, nor the story, offered even one iota of proof. You are dishonest.
Let's see. A person who guesses that the US controls Pakistan's nukes and assures his fellow forum members that everything's hunky dory based on the guess.
versus
A person who cogently lays out arguments about how Pakistan's warheads and nculear fuel are guarded by Al Qaida sympathizers and substantiates it with multiple links and sources.
Who's dishonest here? Your honesty lies in the rear end of a C-130 that flew out a long time ago.
But that's not what you did, is it? You didn't just think the word "mutiny", rather you willfully chose to commit a fraud upon the forum by falsely changing the title to lead off with "Mutiny in the Pakistan army", when you knew perfectly well that no such word or phrase could be found in the actual title or body of the story. You are dishonest.
Aw poor baby. Did I hurt your feelings by making you think?
What I did was perfectly fine because the purport of the article I posted was reflected in the title. You are just pissed because it upsets your carefully constructed fictional world.
Take your irrational anti-Pakistan bias and paranoia somewhere else.
No. And unlike you, I'm not going to ask you to take your GIS based intellectual diarrhea that you pass for analysis elsewhere.
Why? I'm not afraid to debate. But if you are afraid to argue and debate based on facts - tough.
I'm here to stay and will not hesitate to burst your bubble. Any time, any day. Try looking that up in a map. And stop the personal attacks, which is a known forum rule that you violate at will.
First, as you well know, I made NO such claim, it was clearly stated to be "My guess is...". You are dishonest.
Second, if you want to revisit an issue from a previous thread and challenge a poster about what they said there, then do so on that thread, not here. Forum policy.
You can obfuscate all you want, change the subject, rant, post irrelevant diatribes, what ever. You aren't getting off the hook until you answer for your lies.
You started this thread with the lie that these "lower level officers and enlisted men" actually "hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads". Where is your proof for that reckless accusation?
--Boot Hill
Nothing like a few public beheadings to focus the rest of the troops on their duty.
That may be your current policy, but it's not mine, Boot's or the Administration's.
Second, if you want to revisit an issue from a previous thread and challenge a poster about what they said there, then do so on that thread, not here. Forum policy.
In other words, you admit you cannot back up your bogus claim and want to hide behind "forum policy"? This is hilarious and hypocritical to boot, no pun intended. How many times have you asked others to explain what they posted in other threads? Just look at your own post above, #27. Why did you post my words from other threads, if you know it's forum policy not to challenge people's postings from other threads?
Like I said, stop digging when you hit the bottom.
You can obfuscate all you want, change the subject, rant, post irrelevant diatribes, what ever. You aren't getting off the hook until you answer for your lies.
I'm not the one hiding behind "forum policy" mister. I have answered your question - in my previous posts. Since you choose to ignore it, I'll humor you once more.
The question -> "Why do the Pakistani army's lower level officers hold the keys to Pakistan's nuclear weapons?"
The answer -> Many experts have pointed out the danger of the inside threat in Pakistan and it is not just about the warheads, but also about the nuclear fuel, which you have consistently avoided talking about.
For example, see this report by the Congressional Research Service - a US government entity, titled "Nuclear Terrorism: A Brief Review of Threats and Responses." See the report in Daily Times based on the CRS report.
Pakistan feared as source of nuclear terror
The fear regarding Pakistan is that some members of the armed forces might covertly give a weapon to terrorists or that, if President Musharraf were overthrown, an Islamic fundamentalist government or a state of chaos in Pakistan might enable terrorists to obtain a weapon.Terrorists or rogue states might acquire a nuclear weapon in several ways. The nations of greatest concern as potential sources of weapons or fissile materials are widely thought to be Russia and Pakistan.
Many experts believe that technically sophisticated terrorists could, without state support, fabricate a nuclear bomb from HEU.
For another example, see the CNN feature titled "The Nuclear Threat." Below is a quote from nuclear expert Matthew Bunn, from the transcript available online
ENSOR: While the Pakistani military is believed to keep tight guard on nuclear facilities, who is doing the guarding is another question.BUNN: The famous Roman question, "Who guards the guardians?" is a critical one. If 41 heavily armed terrorists can show up without warning in the middle of Moscow, imagine how many might show up at a Pakistani nuclear weapon storage facility and then do you think the guards at that facility are going to fight them off or help? That, to my mind, is a very open question.
Both the above make clear that just PALs on warheads (which is not certain BTW) are inadequate means to secure Pakistan's nukes and those who guard the Pakistani nuclear facilities are critical links in the chain. If PALs are all it took, why is the US government saying otherwise - in an official document?
The answer is that PALs are just one small safety feature, mainly intended to avoid accidental nuclear war. Who's guarding the facilities is the other key part for which you have no answer. How many Generals you know do sentry duty after getting the stars? Ergo -> I have conclusively proved my point, again, while you can only avoid questions posed to you.
Now, I challenge you yet again:
1. Why have you avoided talking about the nuclear fuel and who' guarding them - both in the warheads as well as in storage facilities?
2. If PALs are all it took to guard nukes, why is the US government spending billions of greenbacks to secure and destroy Russia's nuclear fuel - both in the warheads as well as stored elsewhere?
It is quite clear that you've got nothing other than your color coded BS and bluster and seek to hide behind "forum policy." But the time for your obfuscation is over.
You've been called out and you choose to duck.
That may be your current policy, but it's not mine, Boot's or the Administration's.
Can you think of a few instances in the last couple of years where the Bush administration criticized Musharraf?
If the shoe fits...
You started this thread with the lie that these "lower level officers and enlisted men" actually "hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads". Where is your proof for that reckless accusation?
--Boot Hill
Being beaten in a debate has that effect on some.
All the answers to your pathetic question are in Post# 35, as I'm sure everyone can see.
It is very easy to dismiss a well reasoned, to the point reply as "rant and rave," but your deceit and ineptitude are for all to see Boot Hill.
If you have a little bit of intellectual honesty left, you'll read Post #35 and learn.
How pathetic!
Post# 38 are for a reply to Boot Hill. I just wanted you folks to see how Mr. Hill deliberately ignores stuff that is inconvenient to him.
"lower level officers and enlisted men" actually "hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads". Where is your proof for that reckless accusation?
There are these things called nuclear warheads. The things that make them go boom are called nuclear fuel. It is a well known fact that except in times of war, Pakistan stores these warheads in parts, with the nuclear fuel and the detonation mechanism separately.
Pakistan's Generals, like every army's Generals, are not known to guard facilities. Ergo, enlisted men and lower level officers guard these sites. While PALs may prevent accidental detonation of nuclear devices, they do not prevent a determined group of people from emptying the HEU from a warhead and making another crude nuclear or radiological device.
Ergo, it is clear that lower level Pakistan army officers and enlisted men hold the keys to Pakistan's arsenal and any militancy in their midst poses a direct threat to American interests.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.