Pakistan expanding nuclear program...

Bullypulpit

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
382
Points
48
Location
Columbus, OH
Our good friend and ally in the 'war on terror', <a href=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/23/AR2006072300737.html>Pakistan, is building a third heavy water reactor</a> at the Kushab nuclear facility, in addition to the two it already has. According to reports, this reactor will be capable of producing enough plutonium for 40 to 50 nukes each year.

Now, why does Pakistan get to produce all of the nukes it wants with the tacit approval, as in the utter silence, of the Bush administration on this issue? Pakistan is in far greater danger of falling to Islamic fundamentalists in the near term than Iran is of developing a nuclear weapon so, why is the Bush administration so fixated on putting a halt to Iran's nuclear program rather than bringing Pakistan's to a halt? Myopia?...arrogance?...Stupidity?...All of the above?
 

onedomino

SCE to AUX
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Messages
2,677
Reaction score
478
Points
98
Our good friend and ally in the 'war on terror', <a href=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/23/AR2006072300737.html>Pakistan, is building a third heavy water reactor</a> at the Kushab nuclear facility, in addition to the two it already has. According to reports, this reactor will be capable of producing enough plutonium for 40 to 50 nukes each year.

Now, why does Pakistan get to produce all of the nukes it wants with the tacit approval, as in the utter silence, of the Bush administration on this issue? Pakistan is in far greater danger of falling to Islamic fundamentalists in the near term than Iran is of developing a nuclear weapon so, why is the Bush administration so fixated on putting a halt to Iran's nuclear program rather than bringing Pakistan's to a halt? Myopia?...arrogance?...Stupidity?...All of the above?
Pakistan is very dangerous, no doubt. But it already has nuclear weapons, Iran does not. If there was some way to shove Pakistan back into the bottle, then I am sure we would try. Your statement that Pakistan is in greater danger of falling to religious fanatics, than Iran is of obtaining a nuclear weapon, is not a reasonable comparison. If we do nothing, Pakistan may never fall to religious madmen, while Iran will surely obtain nuclear weapons. Are you suggesting that we should send special ops into Pakistan and try to grab their nukes? The one thing we can do with Pakistan is to suppress its ability to obtain long range missiles, so they remain a threat to India, and less to others. Remember, it was India that provoked the nuclear weaponization of South Asia, not Pakistan. Bully, today's excercise in blaming the Bush Administration for everything is a failure. Nice try.
 
OP
Bullypulpit

Bullypulpit

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
382
Points
48
Location
Columbus, OH
Pakistan is very dangerous, no doubt. But it already has nuclear weapons, Iran does not. If there was some way to shove Pakistan back into the bottle, then I am sure we would try. Your statement that Pakistan is in greater danger of falling to religious fanatics, than Iran is of obtaining a nuclear weapon, is not a reasonable comparison. If we do nothing, Pakistan may never fall to religious madmen, while Iran will surely obtain nuclear weapons. Are you suggesting that we should send special ops into Pakistan and try to grab their nukes? The one thing we can do with Pakistan is to suppress its ability to obtain long range missiles, so they remain a threat to India, and less to others. Remember, it was India that provoked the nuclear weaponization of South Asia, not Pakistan. Bully, today's excercise in blaming the Bush Administration for everything is a failure. Nice try.
I wasn't blaming the Bush administration, I was simply pointing out their logical inconsistency on the matter. Were they consistent in their application of their own peculiar brand of logic, Pakistan would be on the receiving end of the same pressures and threats faced by North Korea and Iran. As for the comparison between Pakistan and Iran, it is valid given the Bush administration's stated goal of keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of Muslim extremists.

As for Pakistan's stability, I refer you <a href=http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3865>HERE</a>. On the "Index of Failed States" Pakistan ranks as the twelfth most unstable state in the world, a drop of twenty-two places since <i>Foreign Policy</i> and <i>Fund for Peace</i> began compiling the data in 2005. Iran is politically more stable and thus, in the long term, more amenable to outside pressure than Pakistan is. Pervez Musharaff is hanging on by a thread and when he falls, the Bush administration's, and the world's, worst nightmare will come to pass...Muslim extremists with nuclear weapons.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top