chillspike
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 04:43 PM
Original message |
| We should be on nuclear alert right now |
|
We went into Pakistan without informing the Pakistani government and without getting their permission. We then killed a terrorist Pakistan may or may not have been protecting. Not saying they would attack us but Pakistan is a nuclear nation. We should be ready for something.
|
The Velveteen Ocelot
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 04:45 PM
Response to Original message |
| 1. Yup. We're gonna be nuked by Pakistan. |
RandomThoughts
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 04:45 PM
Response to Original message |
| 2. Beer and travel money? |
|
Cuase anything else is the same as anything else.
Since I am due beer and travel money, and it seems people are not staying on topic.
|
RagAss
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 04:46 PM
Response to Original message |
OneGrassRoot
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-03-11 06:46 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
derby378
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 04:46 PM
Response to Original message |
| 4. When you cut the head off a chicken... |
|
...it's gonna twitch and flap its wings, and it might even run around a little, but that's about it.
The head of the chicken has been cut off of al-Qaeda. Let's just ride out the rest and we should be in good shape.
|
Posteritatis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 04:47 PM
Response to Original message |
digonswine
(463 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 04:47 PM
Response to Original message |
| 6. That would help us all-no doubt |
tekisui
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 04:48 PM
Response to Original message |
| 7. Reports suggest some support and coordination with Pakistan. |
|
Putting that to the side, we have been carrying out operations in Pakistan with varying levels of support and opposition for years.
Pakistan also doesn't have the means, will or desire to nuke the US. That is silly thinking.
|
Motown_Johnny
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 04:48 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Maybe they can't announce it, for internal Pakistani reasons, but the very idea that we didn't have permission to do that is simply not plausible.
If they were going to go to war with us for killing people inside their boarders they would have done it years ago. No way the will do anything about killing OBL.
|
Vanje
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 04:49 PM
Response to Original message |
blondeatlast
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 04:49 PM
Response to Original message |
kestrel91316
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 04:52 PM
Response to Original message |
| 11. You might be a bit off with the part about the Pakistani government not |
|
giving permission. They need plausible deniability in order to prevent domestic problems from the fundamentalists.
You DO realize you sound like a Bushie with the "Terra! Terra! Terra! Be very afraid!!!" crap? I got rid of my stockpile of plastic sheeting and duct tape and atropine injection and face masks when I figured out Bush was a lying skank whore about the whole terra-ism thing.
|
rabs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
|
"They need plausible deniability in order to prevent domestic problems from the fundamentalists."
----------------
U.S. helos penetrated hundreds of kilometers into Pak territory without being detected? Paks have no radar?
There was a 40/45-minute battle almost next to the equivalent of Pak's West Point and Pak troops/police did not show up?
Then the U.S. helos took off again and scooted out of Pak territory without being detected?
That is why I tend to agree with your observation about plausible deniability. Paks have great reason to be leery of al Qaida fanatics inside their country.
|
chillspike
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
|
It is a Bush knee-jerk reaction. I'm withdrawing my initial post.
|
Shagbark Hickory
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 04:54 PM
Response to Original message |
| 12. Yeah except they can't nuke us. Because if they did.. |
|
over 100 nuclear power plants would melt down and send large quantities of radiation across the world and contaminate pakistan's sources of food and water.
|
Drale
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
| 13. They can't nuke us because |
|
the second the first missile was detected, Pakistan would be a smoking crater. We still have enough nuclear weapons in our possession to destroy the entire world, and I'm betting India would take the opportunity to get rid of Pakistan once and for all as well.
|
JVS
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-03-11 06:44 AM
Response to Reply #13 |
| 26. They can't nuke us because their missiles wouldn't reach us at anyway. |
|
Jesus people, doesn't anyone know a fucking thing about delivery systems?
|
Solomon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 05:09 PM
Response to Original message |
| 15. I've always thought that Pakistan was the big problem over |
|
Edited on Mon May-02-11 05:10 PM by Solomon
there. They play both sides. They have nukes. The point is not whether they can deliver one here - doing one over there is the next worse thing right? They can nuke SOMEONE. That's what makes it so delicate. And I think Obama has known this from the start and that's why he addressed it in his campaign. He was lambasted for saying that he would go into Pakistan to take out Bin Laden. He always knew they were the ones harboring Bin Laden. They were helping us and other elements harboring him at the same time. The fact that they have nukes makes it extremely delicate. I think Obama gets a huge amount of credit here. It puts to rest any doubts as to whether the man is "Presidential". Let's just hope some religious idiot over here, crushed by the demise of Bin Laden, who I'm sure they believed was blessed and protected by Allah, doesn't do something stupid.
|
Bluebear
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 05:12 PM
Response to Original message |
| 16. OK, everyone DUCK AND COVER! |
WinkyDink
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 07:19 PM
Response to Original message |
| 18. Pakistan would not DARE. |
roamer65
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-02-11 07:28 PM
Response to Original message |
| 19. I'd be more scared about AQ Khan giving Al Qaeda the bomb... |
|
than a direct attack from Pakistan.
|
chillspike
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-03-11 06:39 AM
Response to Reply #19 |
| 21. And that's probably how I should have stated it in my opening post |
|
See my post below. Thanks.
|
chillspike
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-03-11 06:37 AM
Response to Original message |
| 20. Perhaps I stated it wrongly |
|
Even though I did say, I didn't think Pakistan would attack, I want to reframe my opening post:
Maybe Pakistan wouldn't never attack us, but considering the elements within the Pakistani government sympathetic to Bin Laden, is it possible, since Pakistan has access to nuclear technology, they might secretly assist members of Al Quada in assembling a small nuclear device? Then give it to them to detonate in the states?
Again, not saying it's going to happen but wouldn't the job of a good homeland security team be to expect such a possibility?
Of course, if you think I'm being stupid, I'm open to hearing that to and would probably accept that.
|
Warren Stupidity
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-03-11 07:05 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
| 33. No the Pakistani government is not giving al qaeda a bomb. |
|
Not now, not over the last ten years.
|
NNN0LHI
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-03-11 06:40 AM
Response to Original message |
| 22. No one, not even Pakistan wants to play the game called MAD |
|
Relax and take my word on this one.
Don
|
chillspike
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-03-11 06:48 AM
Response to Reply #22 |
|
Everybody responding today still thinks I'm still proposing this scenario. It was too late to edit my opening post. But I've amended my thoughts here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1016896&mesg_id=1022105
|
brooklynite
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-03-11 06:40 AM
Response to Original message |
| 23. The Pakistanis have Nukes, they don't have a delivery system... |
|
except for the ability to lob something over the border into India.
But feel free to keep obsessing.
|
chillspike
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-03-11 06:45 AM
Response to Reply #23 |
| 27. LOL...some of you are so tough on me...lol |
|
I'm not obsessed but I can understand if you feel this thread is just another conspiracy theory. I didn't mean it that way, though.
I just wanted to put this out there as a scenario a crack homeland security team might (MIGHT) be on the look out for.
|
H2O Man
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-03-11 06:41 AM
Response to Original message |
| 24. The sky is falling!!!!! |
CBGLuthier
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-03-11 06:42 AM
Response to Original message |
| 25. A reminder once again of why we really need a |
|
LAMEST page to go with the GREATEST page. This would shoot to the top.
|
a la izquierda
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-03-11 06:45 AM
Response to Original message |
| 28. Whoa, lay off the drugs my friend. |
|
Pakistans, as far as I can tell from a really brief search, doesn't have ICBMs.
|
JVS
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-03-11 06:50 AM
Response to Original message |
| 31. 2,500 km is the maximum range of Pakistan's missiles. |
Warren Stupidity
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-03-11 06:51 AM
Response to Original message |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Feb 27th 2026, 05:17 PM
Response to Original message |