Originally posted by hammer
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Britons training in Pakistan for UK terror attacks
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostA dirty bomb is a chemical attack and thus is a violation of the CWC. Such an attack was warranted a nuclear response since a chem is considered a WMD. However, since Obama's NPR, if you're a non-nuclear weapons state signatory to the NPT, a nuclear response has been taken off the table.
As in the movie (and a similar novel on which I think the movie was based), does the dirty bomb not have a radiation/sub-nuclear detonation component to it? Made with the stuff used in watches etc.? The helicopter sequence shows that there is also an EMP component involved. I think we are talking about different things then.
I am talking about the Harrison Ford / Morgan Freeman movie. Not the George Clooney one where its a proper smuggled ex-Soviet nuke.
Cheers, DocLast edited by vsdoc; 07 Oct 10,, 14:17.
Comment
-
Originally posted by vsdoc View PostAs in the movie (and a similar novel on which I think the movie was based), does the dirty bomb not have a radiation/sub-nuclear detonation component to it?
A dirty bomb is just to spread radioactive materials.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostThat's a nuke. A dirty inefficent nuke but still a nuke. The fissible material were blown apart faster than they can achieve initiation but it is a nuke and thus subject to full nuclear retalliation. And no, you cannot build such a bomb from watches. In theory you can but you need 64 kgs and a purity that frankly is not there.
A dirty bomb is just to spread radioactive materials.
Cheers, Doc
Comment
-
Originally posted by Pakmiran View PostAlways remember that Pakistan has its own interests. What's Pakistan trying to achieve by supporting terror ops? I suspect this blockade of the supply line was a method to aid in the success of these European gunmen by discouraging overt or covert American actions in Pakistani territory. What's the agenda?
I ts surprising to see that suddenly the terrorists have had a nice run at blasting supplies into Afghanistan since one route was closed.
As for terror in general, that depends on which terror ops you are talking about.
Comment
-
Originally posted by S-2 View PostI've a Pakistani friend here, IHM, who's working hard with his friends to shift the paradigm of political thought inside his country. In my view he is very, very brave.
Originally posted by S-2 View PostWorse, the Pakistanis appear to have little appreciation for the blowback awaiting them should the afghan taliban be fully unleashed, as is their current bent. What they're now experiencing is but a small harbinger concerning the shape of things to come. In turn, such a reversal of fortune in Pakistan will likely provide America with the rationale for a more overt and onerous intervention.
Originally posted by vsdoc View PostI am referring to the very real possibility of a future Shahzad with a dirty bomb that has either been smuggled in from the sea or else built/assembled partially or wholly on mainland US, for detonation on mainland US. That's what I meant when I said that the US dodged a bullet this time around.
No likely repeats of 26/11 either, certainly not to the level we experienced. Who's going to do all the hand holding when the op is in progress ? Copy cat attempts, sure, but thats not going to have the same impact by a long shot.
Originally posted by vsdoc View PostI don't think they can. They could not in this case. And historically the US has not had a very good track record of detecting and dealing with lone wolves on time. Afterwards really is too little too late. The damage is done. One man versus the lives of hundreds, maybe thousands, maybe more, is never going to be good barter.
Originally posted by vsdoc View PostI do not agree. Neither I suspect does the US state and those that are calling the shots on homeland security. I suppose on this time will tell which one of us was right.
Originally posted by vsdoc View PostThe Pakistani state did not know about or control Shahzad.
Originally posted by vsdoc View PostNeither have they controlled terror acts that have a sickening habit of now leading back to pakistan through not very forked linkages.
Originally posted by vsdoc View PostI fail to see how the weight of this evidence in the collective perception and stance of the western powers towards pakistan can be helping Pakistan.
How is it helping them ? Because they have managed to wring out as much as they can out of these interactions without any negative effects. The regime is still in place and secure.
A few headlines asserting alarmist scenarios is nothing for them. Its rather cliched by now
Originally posted by vsdoc View PostThe tide is shifting and pakistan will increasingly be isolated and called to book. No longer do they have a blank cheque to encash, often to the detriment of India.
Originally posted by vsdoc View PostAll that stops the minute the US feels directly threatened.
Originally posted by vsdoc View PostIts not possible for a superpower to continue labouring under the delusion that the entity creating the mess is the one that will magically finally hold the key to the broom closet that will help clean it up.
Originally posted by vsdoc View PostPlease see above.
Originally posted by vsdoc View PostI feel they have exhausted all possible goodwill and have tried the patience of one and all to the breaking point. Retribution is not far away, and I can only pray that we get a crack at them while there still some life left in thm as a nation state capable of hitting back.
Originally posted by vsdoc View PostWe are not talking about a negotiated permission here. But S-2 has already answered this.
Now as to why the US will actually intiate this needs further discussion.
Originally posted by vsdoc View PostA lot of US blood and dollars have flowed under the bridge since then, with the very real threat of the madness now crossing the seven seas and hitting home. The US will act. Of that I have no doubt.Last edited by Double Edge; 07 Oct 10,, 16:46.
Comment
-
Pakistan has strengthened its air defense with a view to preventing NATO forces from intruding into its territory from Afghanistan.
The strong US ally has installed anti-aircraft missiles in its tribal regions bordering Afghanistan, well-placed sources told Arab News here on Monday.
“Now no helicopter will be able to escape after entering into Pakistani territory,” the official sources said.
They will fire on US and NATO? To save a bunch of people who deserve to die.
Comment
-
Double Edge Reply
"He said let them rot, that the US withold all sorts of support, financial & military. I would be in favour of this. It stands a good chance of change in behaviour."
Possibly. Meanwhile doing the same likely means losing Afghanistan to the taliban. I'm simply recommending recognition of this probability regardless of our aid thus cutting losses.
"But they are not wholly reliant on the US, there is China & the Saudi's. If all three do the same then chances increase."
How the PRC and S.A. react to an American/NATO withdrawal from both Pakistan and Afghanistan will be interesting. It's enough to know that Pakistan largely managed to survive between 1989 and 2001 without our assistance. Whether that would repeat itself isn't necessarily fore-ordained.
"Now as to why the US will actually intiate this needs further discussion..."
My position constitutes a radical departure from prevailing views now possessed by American policy-makers. The huge, though failed, effort to construct an aid program in Pakistan is, alone, a major impediment to any ground-shift in our policy views. There are significantly entrenched forces within Congress, DoD and State that are invested in Pakistan's development. Kerry-Lugar remains a tangible manifestation of our commitment and wholly counter to my decidedly minority perspective.
I won't hold my breath. I believe my views are largely vindicated in the behind-the-scenes chatter now about sanctuary but getting there from here is a long, long way from happening."This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
"The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs
Comment
-
Originally posted by S-2 View PostHow the PRC and S.A. react to an American/NATO withdrawal from both Pakistan and Afghanistan will be interesting. It's enough to know that Pakistan largely managed to survive between 1989 and 2001 without our assistance. Whether that would repeat itself isn't necessarily fore-ordained.
The nineties had increased militancy in Kashmir despite a lack of US support. So witholding military support did not have any positive effect wrt to India. I don't know if that will be the same elsewhere tho.
Originally posted by S-2 View PostI won't hold my breath. I believe my views are largely vindicated in the behind-the-scenes chatter now about sanctuary but getting there from here is a long, long way from happening.
Comment
-
Double Edge Reply
"OOE thinks China is not going to support the Taliban."
He's very likely correct. China faces it's own uighar issues in their west. How uighar ambitions intersect with the taliban I'm still uncertain. The afghan taliban haven't actively promoted a trans-national islamic agenda. OTOH, they passively acceded to the use of their lands by Al Qaeda. Further, Pakistani taliban and/or Al Qaeda elements there have provided rest and respite to uighar elements.
China, however, to date has not been a strong and consistent supporter of the present Afghan government nor an active enemy of the taliban. Instead, they've held their cards close while pursuing very narrow self-interests. How that might change should N.A.T.O. and America depart I would find interesting.
"It would be difficult for the Saudi's to do so when everyone is against it."
Maybe. Maybe not. Saudi Arabia and the taliban find common ground amidst their religion. When the rest of the world found it impossible to treat with the previous afghan taliban government, KSA, the UAE and Pakistan did not. Their shared enmity towards shias creates natural bedfellows. So too the fertile ground in the Afghan pashtun south which Saudi theologians have found for exporting their wahabbist/salafi brand of islam.
Relationships will likely re-order themselves in the absence of NATO/America. How so and to what extent is the lingering question."This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
"The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs
Comment
-
Originally posted by S-2 View PostFurther, Pakistani taliban and/or Al Qaeda elements there have provided rest and respite to uighar elements.Originally posted by S-2 View PostRelationships will likely re-order themselves in the absence of NATO/America. How so and to what extent is the lingering question.
With hindsight and time that's passed there should be strong support for the Afghan's by all except Pakistan in the area. I'm sure you'll not leave until that is in place. That should be enough, hopefully, along with the aid that will be flowing through to keep things stable or as close as can relatively be expected for the region. That is the positive scenario, the negative one is it reverts back to what it was pre-2001 but that seems less likely.
Those are the only two scenarios possible here or are there any more ?
I've read your earlier posts where you think the job is not finished and expect to be back, to complete it, kinda like with Saddam in 2004. But the very purpose of that action will not be lost on Pakistan. So i do not think you will be back.Last edited by Double Edge; 08 Oct 10,, 20:57.
Comment
-
I don't think their wasting their time with ballistics or cruise missiles. Are those the only "delivery" options? I also doubt if it would be a dirty nuke. Besides non-state actors and guidance, i doubt if my neighbour would play a greater role than that. And what happens when you trace it back to 4-5 states and it's all a case of non-state actors? Most pre-determined targets scramble to safety within 45min from the incident. Carpet bomb what mega cities? It appears that the enemy calls you out and makes you fight on a ground of their choosing. Now isn't that what happened in afg? The enemy brought you to the battlefield and ware you out?
So i ask... what is the next bait that america is certain to take? And there lies your answer of whether it is a possibility.
Comment
Comment