Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
and then

Will Pakistan go full Fundamentalist?

79 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

and then

https://www.businessinsider.com/indias-modi-unleashes-military-on-pakistan-after-pulwama-terrorism-2019-2 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-pakistan/iran-says-pakistan-to-pay-high-price-over-attack-warns-saudi-idUSKCN1Q507R 

Pakistan's government is denying any involvement in an attack that killed 44 Indian police in Kashmir, likewise, they are disavowing any support of another terror group that killed 27 IRGC troops in Iran.  It seems like the fundamentalist elements within Pakistan's ISI may be gaining too much strength.  The harboring of like-minded rebel groups can be costly but killing 44 state police in a way that leaves India no way out but retaliation is dangerous for the region and maybe even the world.  Islamic fundamentalists with nukes.  What could go wrong? :unsure2:  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spud the mackem
1 hour ago, and then said:

https://www.businessinsider.com/indias-modi-unleashes-military-on-pakistan-after-pulwama-terrorism-2019-2 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-pakistan/iran-says-pakistan-to-pay-high-price-over-attack-warns-saudi-idUSKCN1Q507R 

Pakistan's government is denying any involvement in an attack that killed 44 Indian police in Kashmir, likewise, they are disavowing any support of another terror group that killed 27 IRGC troops in Iran.  It seems like the fundamentalist elements within Pakistan's ISI may be gaining too much strength.  The harboring of like-minded rebel groups can be costly but killing 44 state police in a way that leaves India no way out but retaliation is dangerous for the region and maybe even the world.  Islamic fundamentalists with nukes.  What could go wrong? :unsure2:  

The Indians and Pakistani's have been in a semi war condition for years , with both Countries sneakily attacking each other in border skirmishes , maybe because the Indians are more pro-western and have a lot more resources than the Pakistani's. The danger is that they both have Nukes and it only needs one to start obliteration for both and the rest of the world. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spartan max2
19 minutes ago, spud the mackem said:

The Indians and Pakistani's have been in a semi war condition for years , with both Countries sneakily attacking each other in border skirmishes , maybe because the Indians are more pro-western and have a lot more resources than the Pakistani's. The danger is that they both have Nukes and it only needs one to start obliteration for both and the rest of the world. 

In this situation you would agree that Pakistan is more at fault though, yes?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spud the mackem
1 minute ago, spartan max2 said:

In this situation you would agree that Pakistan is more at fault though, yes?

Definitely more at fault ,although I am neutral to both parties , the Pakistani's cause more trouble in England than any other race . It seems that the Pakistani's have a lot of terrorist problems , and the Indians are generally a peace loving nation.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
godnodog

I disagree India is more pro-west, India has ties with China and Russia, but I would label them neutral with simpathies for some west values but not that many. Due to regional motives like Pakistan, its on India's best interest to be on good terms with China and Russia.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
14 minutes ago, spud the mackem said:

The Indians and Pakistani's have been in a semi war condition for years , with both Countries sneakily attacking each other in border skirmishes , maybe because the Indians are more pro-western and have a lot more resources than the Pakistani's. The danger is that they both have Nukes and it only needs one to start obliteration for both and the rest of the world. 

Pakistan PROBABLY has a handful of basic fission devices, but I don't think they can mount them on missiles ? There are estimates floating around that they may have up to 120 "devices", but somehow I doubt that. Pakistan - in common with most Islamic nations - has a relatively poor science base. 

A nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan is unlikely to cause world war. India would rapidly slug Pakistan's air force and navy into submission. Neither side can easily invade one another, due to geographical constraints. However, India can devastate Pakistan from the air, and by coastal bombardment. If they choose to use their nuclear weapons, they can return Pakistan to the stone age. (it doesn't have THAT far to go, after all). 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spud the mackem
5 minutes ago, godnodog said:

I disagree India is more pro-west, India has ties with China and Russia, but I would label them neutral with simpathies for some west values but not that many. Due to regional motives like Pakistan, its on India's best interest to be on good terms with China and Russia.

The Brits have strong ties with India and there is estimated 2 million living in Britain , (with an Indian restaurant on every corner ,to stop the Chinese take aways taking control..said with humour)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
1 minute ago, spud the mackem said:

The Brits have strong ties with India and there is estimated 2 million living in Britain , (with an Indian restaurant on every corner ,to stop the Chinese take aways taking control..said with humour)

LOL

Oh.. and those 'Indian' restaurants ? They're mostly Bangladeshi and Pakistani. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
44 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Pakistan PROBABLY has a handful of basic fission devices, but I don't think they can mount them on missiles ? There are estimates floating around that they may have up to 120 "devices", but somehow I doubt that. Pakistan - in common with most Islamic nations - has a relatively poor science base. 

A nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan is unlikely to cause world war. India would rapidly slug Pakistan's air force and navy into submission. Neither side can easily invade one another, due to geographical constraints. However, India can devastate Pakistan from the air, and by coastal bombardment. If they choose to use their nuclear weapons, they can return Pakistan to the stone age. (it doesn't have THAT far to go, after all). 

Pakistan's nuclear weapons are mounted on missiles and they have actually developed road mobile missile launch platforms similar to what Russia uses.

As for basic fission devices in 1998 Pakistan successfully tested a plutonium based nuclear weapon so they have definitely moved past basic fission weapons to more advanced ones decades ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
29 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Pakistan's nuclear weapons are mounted on missiles and they have actually developed road mobile missile launch platforms similar to what Russia uses.

As for basic fission devices in 1998 Pakistan successfully tested a plutonium based nuclear weapon so they have definitely moved past basic fission weapons to more advanced ones decades ago.

Some people believe that Pakistan has functional mobile atomic missiles. And some people disagree. And most people don't know one way or the other. 

As for plutonium.. that is irrelevant. A plutonium-driven atomic bomb is just an atomic bomb. It is neither more powerful, nor more sophisticated, than a Uranium driven bomb. The bomb that landed on Nagasake was a plutonium bomb. 

The BIG difference is FUSION bombs (nuclear weapons) - sometimes referred to as H-bombs , as opposed to FISSION bombs (atomic weapons). Fusion bombs can be a hundred times more powerful than a fission bomb.  Neither India or Pakistan have fusion bombs. 

Edited by RoofGardener

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sci-nerd

Frankly I don't care about the muslim world. If they want to live an ancient lifestyle, let them.

Those who disagree will escape, and if the other threaten us, we will destroy them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Razumov
2 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Some people believe that Pakistan has functional mobile atomic missiles. And some people disagree. And most people don't know one way or the other.

Forget North Korea: Pakistan's Nuclear Weapons Should Truly Terrify You

rtx32c1oggg.jpg?itok=5R8ZA6wY

Pakistan currently has a nuclear “triad” of nuclear delivery systems based on land, in the air and at sea. Islamabad is believed to have modified American-built F-16A fighters and possibly French-made Mirage fighters to deliver nuclear bombs by 1995. Since the fighters would have to penetrate India’s air defense network to deliver their payloads against cities and other targets, Pakistani aircraft would likely be deliver tactical nuclear weapons against battlefield targets.

Land-based delivery systems are in the form of missiles, with many designs based on or influenced by Chinese and North Korean designs. The Hatf series of mobile missiles includes the solid-fueled  Hatf-III (180 miles), solid-fueled  Hatf-IV (466 miles) and liquid-fueled  Hatf V , (766 miles). The CSIS Missile Threat Initiative believes that as of 2014,  Hatf VI  (1242 miles) is likely in service. Pakistan is also developing a  Shaheen III  intermediate-range missile capable of striking targets out to 1708 miles, in order to strike the Nicobar and Andaman Islands.

The sea component of Pakistan’s nuclear force consists of the Babur class of cruise missiles. The latest version, Babur-2, looks like most modern cruise missiles, with a bullet-like shape, a cluster of four tiny tail wings and two stubby main wings, all powered by a turbofan or turbojet engine. The cruise missile has a range of 434 miles. Instead of GPS guidance, which could be disabled regionally by the U.S. government, Babur-2 uses older Terrain Contour Matching (TERCOM) and Digital Scene Matching and Area Co-relation (DSMAC) navigation technology. Babur-2 is deployed on both land and at sea on ships, where they would be more difficult to neutralize. A submarine-launched version,  Babur-3, was tested in January and would be the most survivable of all Pakistani nuclear delivery systems.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
1 hour ago, RoofGardener said:

Some people believe that Pakistan has functional mobile atomic missiles. And some people disagree. And most people don't know one way or the other. 

As for plutonium.. that is irrelevant. A plutonium-driven atomic bomb is just an atomic bomb. It is neither more powerful, nor more sophisticated, than a Uranium driven bomb. The bomb that landed on Nagasake was a plutonium bomb. 

The BIG difference is FUSION bombs (nuclear weapons) - sometimes referred to as H-bombs , as opposed to FISSION bombs (atomic weapons). Fusion bombs can be a hundred times more powerful than a fission bomb.  Neither India or Pakistan have fusion bombs. 

There is no doubt that Pakistan has functional mobile atomic missile launchers.  They successfully tested the babur missile in 2005 which is a cruise missile that can be launched from a mobile ground platform currently and Pakistan is working on getting it to be launched from their submarines.  Who disagrees that Pakistan has mobile nuclear missile launchers

You clearly have little to no understanding of nuclear weaponry.

Plutonium based bombs are far from irrelevant and are generally more sophisticated.  Uranium based bombs can be detonated gun method, simply slamming two sub critical pieces of uranium together to create a single super critical mass and that is very easy to produce, or by implosion.  Plutonium based weapons can only be created by an implosion method of detonation which is far more complicated engineering wise and much more efficient in nuclear material used.  So the mere fact that Pakistan successfully tested a plutonium warhead shows that Pakistan is capable of making the much more complicated implosion style nuclear detonators which can be miniaturized to be put on missiles and also opens them up to creating boosted fission weapons that fill in the spot between pure fission and fusion weapons.

Little boy, the uranium based nuclear weapon used 64 kg of enriched uranium and had a blast yield of 15 kt.  Fat man, the plutonium based nuclear weapon used 6.4 kg of plutonium and had a blast yield of 21 kt.  Both nuclear weapons were crude but there is a reason why all nuclear missile use implosion method, also pound for pound plutonium requires a smaller mass to reach super critical mass then uranium.

And I know about fusion weapons and the difference between them and atomic weapons, I'm pretty sure I know far more then you on the subject anyway given the fact that you see no difference between uranium and plutonium based nuclear weapons.  Also if one wants to get super technical your hundred of times more powerful statement is wrong as fission weapons have a maximum blast yield while fusion weapons dont.  The only limit on fusion weapons is how much fusionable material is used plus the physical size of the weapon.  

As for if Pakistan and India having them or not that is debated.  During the six underground nuclear test Pakistan did in 1998 they used a boosted fission weapon in at least one of the test if not more.  Since all the ingredients needed for a fusion weapon are present in a boosted fission weapon it would not be terribly hard for Pakistan to create a fusion weapon.  India on the other hand has claimed it has fusion weapons but so far hasn't produced any conclusive evidence that they actually got anything beyond boosted fission weapons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Black Red Devil
4 hours ago, godnodog said:

I disagree India is more pro-west, India has ties with China and Russia, but I would label them neutral with simpathies for some west values but not that many. Due to regional motives like Pakistan, its on India's best interest to be on good terms with China and Russia.

I'd say their ties with China are improving but still quite fragile, from both an economic and military perspective. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Black Red Devil
6 hours ago, and then said:

https://www.businessinsider.com/indias-modi-unleashes-military-on-pakistan-after-pulwama-terrorism-2019-2 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-pakistan/iran-says-pakistan-to-pay-high-price-over-attack-warns-saudi-idUSKCN1Q507R 

Pakistan's government is denying any involvement in an attack that killed 44 Indian police in Kashmir, likewise, they are disavowing any support of another terror group that killed 27 IRGC troops in Iran.  It seems like the fundamentalist elements within Pakistan's ISI may be gaining too much strength.  The harboring of like-minded rebel groups can be costly but killing 44 state police in a way that leaves India no way out but retaliation is dangerous for the region and maybe even the world.  Islamic fundamentalists with nukes.  What could go wrong? :unsure2:  

The fact they allowed the Taliban to settle into their safe haven in Quetta, now and during the times the Afghan war was in full swing, shows their tendency to 'accept' fundamentalists.  I think US foreign aid has been keeping them on the good side but this may change now that Trump's cut the supply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Razumov
10 minutes ago, Black Red Devil said:

The fact they allowed the Taliban to settle into their safe haven in Quetta, now and during the times the Afghan war was in full swing, shows their tendency to 'accept' fundamentalists.

If "fundamentalist" means someone who believes in Islam, the whole country is "fundamentalist".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
6 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Pakistan PROBABLY has a handful of basic fission devices, but I don't think they can mount them on missiles ? There are estimates floating around that they may have up to 120 "devices", but somehow I doubt that. Pakistan - in common with most Islamic nations - has a relatively poor science base. 

AQ Kahn trained a LOT of their people and sold them viable weapon designs.  India is more powerful, yes, but Pakistan is crazier and a single detonation in a major city in India could kill a million or more.  I don't know the state of India's anti-ballistic missile defense but Pakistan DOES have medium-range ballistic missiles that can do the job if India can't take them out.  I'm not too concerned with the ISI triggering such a conflict intentionally.  If it were to happen it would be due to a fundy splinter group within the government.  

Even if they never use nukes they have the potential to be a nightmare for the region if the hardcore Fundies gain control of the government and the codes.  It's a bit unsettling, to say the least, that even Iran is having to threaten them.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#Land

Edited by and then

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Black Red Devil
10 hours ago, Razumov said:

If "fundamentalist" means someone who believes in Islam, the whole country is "fundamentalist".

Maybe you should look up the word 'fundamentalist' because its not specific to Islam.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
6 hours ago, Black Red Devil said:

Maybe you should look up the word 'fundamentalist' because its not specific to Islam.

Name a single terrorist attack attributed to non-Islamic "fundamentalists" ? 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
On 16/02/2019 at 10:35 PM, DarkHunter said:

There is no doubt that Pakistan has functional mobile atomic missile launchers.  They successfully tested the babur missile in 2005 which is a cruise missile that can be launched from a mobile ground platform currently and Pakistan is working on getting it to be launched from their submarines.  Who disagrees that Pakistan has mobile nuclear missile launchers

You clearly have little to no understanding of nuclear weaponry.

Plutonium based bombs are far from irrelevant and are generally more sophisticated.  Uranium based bombs can be detonated gun method, simply slamming two sub critical pieces of uranium together to create a single super critical mass and that is very easy to produce, or by implosion.  Plutonium based weapons can only be created by an implosion method of detonation which is far more complicated engineering wise and much more efficient in nuclear material used.  So the mere fact that Pakistan successfully tested a plutonium warhead shows that Pakistan is capable of making the much more complicated implosion style nuclear detonators which can be miniaturized to be put on missiles and also opens them up to creating boosted fission weapons that fill in the spot between pure fission and fusion weapons.

Little boy, the uranium based nuclear weapon used 64 kg of enriched uranium and had a blast yield of 15 kt.  Fat man, the plutonium based nuclear weapon used 6.4 kg of plutonium and had a blast yield of 21 kt.  Both nuclear weapons were crude but there is a reason why all nuclear missile use implosion method, also pound for pound plutonium requires a smaller mass to reach super critical mass then uranium.

And I know about fusion weapons and the difference between them and atomic weapons, I'm pretty sure I know far more then you on the subject anyway given the fact that you see no difference between uranium and plutonium based nuclear weapons.  Also if one wants to get super technical your hundred of times more powerful statement is wrong as fission weapons have a maximum blast yield while fusion weapons dont.  The only limit on fusion weapons is how much fusionable material is used plus the physical size of the weapon.  

As for if Pakistan and India having them or not that is debated.  During the six underground nuclear test Pakistan did in 1998 they used a boosted fission weapon in at least one of the test if not more.  Since all the ingredients needed for a fusion weapon are present in a boosted fission weapon it would not be terribly hard for Pakistan to create a fusion weapon.  India on the other hand has claimed it has fusion weapons but so far hasn't produced any conclusive evidence that they actually got anything beyond boosted fission weapons.

Every single 'fact' in your piece is based on press releases from Pakistan state TV, DarkHunter. NONE of it has been independently confirmed. Somehow, I REALLY doubt that Pakistan has significant numbers of cruise missiles - or medium range missiles - capable of carrying a nuclear weapon to a target, and successfully detonating it

On 17/02/2019 at 1:04 AM, and then said:

AQ Kahn trained a LOT of their people and sold them viable weapon designs.  India is more powerful, yes, but Pakistan is crazier and a single detonation in a major city in India could kill a million or more.  I don't know the state of India's anti-ballistic missile defense but Pakistan DOES have medium-range ballistic missiles that can do the job if India can't take them out.  I'm not too concerned with the ISI triggering such a conflict intentionally.  If it were to happen it would be due to a fundy splinter group within the government.  

Even if they never use nukes they have the potential to be a nightmare for the region if the hardcore Fundies gain control of the government and the codes.  It's a bit unsettling, to say the least, that even Iran is having to threaten them.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#Land

India has a tiered anti-ballistic missile system. The high-altitude defense system (designed to be used against long-range missiles) is called PAD, and the lower-range, lower-altittude system is called AAD. (which is also effective - apparently - against cruise-missile attacks). 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Ballistic_Missile_Defence_Programme

Pakistan has an anti-ballistic-missile system concordant with their level of scientific and technical advancement, as shown below. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
On 17/02/2019 at 4:32 PM, RoofGardener said:

Every single 'fact' in your piece is based on press releases from Pakistan state TV, DarkHunter. NONE of it has been independently confirmed. Somehow, I REALLY doubt that Pakistan has significant numbers of cruise missiles - or medium range missiles - capable of carrying a nuclear weapon to a target, and successfully detonating it

India has a tiered anti-ballistic missile system. The high-altitude defense system (designed to be used against long-range missiles) is called PAD, and the lower-range, lower-altittude system is called AAD. (which is also effective - apparently - against cruise-missile attacks). 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Ballistic_Missile_Defence_Programme

Pakistan has an anti-ballistic-missile system concordant with their level of scientific and technical advancement, as shown below. 

So you cant name one source to back up what you said and refuse to accept what every nation has accepted because you personally believe that Pakistan is just incapable for some reason.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

Ummm.. I'm confused ? I was commenting on the article YOU quoted, which ONLY contains info from Pakistan state TV, with no independent corroboration ? 

Your statement that ".. every nation has accepted.." is, I believe, ENTIRELY in error ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
8 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Ummm.. I'm confused ? I was commenting on the article YOU quoted, which ONLY contains info from Pakistan state TV, with no independent corroboration ? 

Your statement that ".. every nation has accepted.." is, I believe, ENTIRELY in error ? 

What article did you think I quoted as I didnt quote any article but summed up information from multiple sources.

The nuclear test Pakistan did have been independently verified by seimistic data world wide, the only question is the exact size of the warheads used.  As for the missiles there are videos and pictures of successful tests online and you still have yet to name what country or organization doubts that Pakistan has working missiles capable of carrying a nuclear warhead like you claimed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

My apologies DarkHunter.. you are correct. I was confusing YOUR article with that of Ruzamov. 

Well, getting back on track.. your multiple sources are wrong :) 

There was indeed seismic evidence that Pakistan had successfully detonated a basic 1945-style atomic bomb. 

There is zero evidence that they have successfully mated it with a missile. Their tests where conducted down coal mines. 

Granted, perhaps this means they intend to attack India's strategic power supplies ? (e.g. other coal mines ? ). 

Anyway, we're getting off the point. If Pakistan went "full fundamentalist", and attacked India (or provoked an attack BY India), then they would be roundly defeated. 

Edited by RoofGardener

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stevewinn
23 hours ago, spud the mackem said:

Definitely more at fault ,although I am neutral to both parties , the Pakistani's cause more trouble in England than any other race . It seems that the Pakistani's have a lot of terrorist problems , and the Indians are generally a peace loving nation.

Indians Hindu

Pakistani Moslem

need i say more.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.