[ezkcdude]

This is very scary news, folks. I assume some people saw 60 Minutes last night, and the new Pakistani President trying to convince everyone that they are doing their best to fight the Taliban. Not so much, I guess.

[Moogs]

Wait, you mean... Pakistan is backwards too?! Old news. They're a very unnatural ally of any western country, that's for sure.

[ezkcdude]

This is different, though. To actually make a policy of appeasement seems a very scary step. Pakistan has nuclear weapons right now. If the Taliban make their way into the government, it's a potential nightmare scenario.

[billybobsky]

Originally Posted by Moogs Wait, you mean... Pakistan is backwards too?! Old news. They're a very unnatural ally of any western country, that's for sure.

What does that mean, exactly?

Is it because they are predominantly Muslim? I cannot possibly conceive of any other rational.

Pakistan is no less awkward an ally than other nation.

[scratt]

Dun Dun Derr.. scratt has arrived!

Relax ezkcdude I am actually wholly in agreement with you here!

billybobsky, I have to agree with Moogs. As a people (and I am not referring to individuals), but as a mob culture both India and Pakistan are two of the most scary peoples to have nuclear weapons on the planet. Period.

[ezkcdude]

Originally Posted by scratt Dun Dun Derr.. scratt has arrived! Relax ezkcdude I am actually wholly in agreement with you here!

Huzzah!

As a people (and I am not referring to individuals), but as a mob culture both India and Pakistan are two of the most scary peoples to have nuclear weapons on the planet. Period.

I think we should be clear about talking about the Pakistani people per se, versus the Taliban. I am not afraid of moderate Muslim governments. The scary part about Pakistan is that the fundamentalists may take over.

[Moogs]

Originally Posted by billybobsky What does that mean, exactly? Is it because they are predominantly Muslim?

No it's because their government and societal structure is a bizarre mix of centralized and tribal leadership. Pakistan doesn't know what it wants to be IMO. A country with a centralized government, elections, etc... or a country where tribal leaders are given equal standing to elected leaders. I understand there's some rough geography that is behind this to some degree, but Pakistan has a lot of chaos built into their "system" of governing. The lines of authority are very much blurred there between elected officials, military officials and tribal officials AFAICT.

Not the same as say, Malaysia, which also has muslim factions, etc but has a government which is more in control of the entire country and more easily dealt with at the negotiating tables. More predictable, might be another way to look at it. For once I agree with Ezk... Pakistan is a perfect example of a country that has no business owning nuclear weapons, because the government's control over them and even over the military, is not lock-tight the way it is with other nuclear powers.

[curiousuburb]

Not just no control... they're one of the few countries confirmed as active in proliferation.

Remember the 'father of the bomb' in Pakistan, Dr AQ Khan, has publicly admitted selling WMD plans to Syria, North Korea, Iran, and others.

Instead of extradition, Musharraf pardoned him... and he was just released from house arrest and is reportedly unsupervised.

[Fooboy]

REMEMBER THE ALAMO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[JohnnyTheA]

Its very scary that India and Pakistan both have operational Nukes. How the heck did that happen?! People talk about Iran, Pak could be much worse if the radicals take over there.

I didn't see the 60 minutes piece. I have been listening to various NPR stories on Afghanistan though. The border area between Pakistan and Afghanistan is pretty much controlled by Taliban or Taliban-like tribes. They are pushing west into the more urban parts of Afghanistan and east into Pakistan. In both coutries, the governments are almost completely corrupt which is driving a lot of non-crazies to want to sign up with the Taliban. Anything to keep order.

Wonder what Obama will do about this...

JTA

[Moogs]

Speak softly and carry a big stick, hopefully. I personally view that border region as almost being like a separate country from both Afghanistan and Pakistan. Bombs away... who gives a rip what they think about it. If we know we can put the smack down on major planning activities or otherwise disrupt the building up of a new regime... smack away. The thing about military actions via drones is that no one sees it coming and rarely are the casualties more than a dozen or so (very targeted) people. The area has a very low population density, unlike Gaza. It's the exact opposite situation. Very dangerous individuals who are potentially very close to getting their hands on nukes or nuke materials, and very little collateral damage. There's no infrastructure to speak of anyway. Unless you consider mud huts and dirt roads to be infrastructure.

[Swox]

Are the Taliban actually close to getting their hands on nukes? I seriously doubt it. Unless they've somehow infiltrated the highest ranks of the Pakistani military (which I don't believe is the case), they're not going to get anywhere near them.

The Hindutva nutjobs in India have been in control of their arsenal before and nothing happened, so I'm not too worried about it. Not that I don't think we should be monitoring things closely, but I think people are generally overreacting.

I think that integrating people into power structures is often one of the best ways to moderate their views, so I'm not opposed in principal to some modest power sharing, as much as I loathe their principals.

[scratt]

Originally Posted by Swox Are the Taliban actually close to getting their hands on nukes? I seriously doubt it. Unless they've somehow infiltrated the highest ranks of the Pakistani military (which I don't believe is the case), they're not going to get anywhere near them.

They are not actually going to get their hands on nukes. Not as it stands at the moment. But some of the reasonably influential ranks of the Pakistani military have *always* been sympathetic to more extreme Islamic views... This is the root of the problems that most high ranking civilian Pakistani politicians have faced in their difficult relationship with the west. It was also the reason behind Musharaf sticking with his military rank for so long.. which was long misunderstood by the Western media.

This attitude reminds me a bit of the coverage of the coup in Thailand. We had a defacto military dictatorship for quite a while recently, but it was the best thing for the country. However, the western media ignores the facts on the ground and simply bleats on about "dictatorships" and "democracy", while conveniently ignoring that the US is really only one step removed from a military "dictatorship" because of the fantastic power and responsibility visited on one man, and his cabinet!

Originally Posted by Swox The Hindutva nutjobs in India have been in control of their arsenal before and nothing happened, so I'm not too worried about it. Not that I don't think we should be monitoring things closely, but I think people are generally overreacting.

I am always worried when anyone even slightly unstable has even influence over nukes, however small.
I wouldn't have put it past Bush to use them in certain situations, and certainly certain members of his cabinet would have gone along, if they weren't leaning on the button for him already..

Originally Posted by Swox I think that integrating people into power structures is often one of the best ways to moderate their views, so I'm not opposed in principal to some modest power sharing, as much as I loathe their principals.

Agreed.

[Moogs]

Originally Posted by Swox I think that integrating people into power structures is often one of the best ways to moderate their views, so I'm not opposed in principal to some modest power sharing, as much as I loathe their principals.

A valid point though I don't know how much it applies to Muslim Fundamentalists. As for how close, I don't believe the Pakistani military is very advanced in their security measures, nor immune to being corrupted by local warlords, etc. Except for the higher echelons of leadership, I imagine most officers and non-com types are not likely to be the well educated, highly trained individuals like you would see in a western military structure I suspect. Their standards are likely much more loose.

[Swox]

I'm about as worried of Muslim fundies having nukes as I am Christian ones - as scratt has mentioned, Bush had some cute ideas about nukes early on in his White House stay. Nukes in anyone's hands are pretty worrying if you think about the fragility of the human psyche...

I also don't see how, if security was breached, people who are effectively tribesmen could figure out how to arm, target and launch nukes. I imagine it's a bit more complicated than just pushing a big red button... (I hope so anyway!).

I think there's a big difference between being sympathetic to someone's religious views and letting them shoot nukes at whomever they please. Anyone in the military (and probably even the Taliban) would know that even threatening to shoot one, if taken seriously, would result in utter annihilation. They are literally surrounded by countries with nukes who wouldn't hesitate to use them under circumstances like that.

These things don't seem so bad if you've just been cutting poop off your cat's bum. That's much worse, especially just before a meal. Yeah, we're having fun over here tonight!

[scratt]

Originally Posted by Swox These things don't seem so bad if you've just been cutting poop off your cat's bum. That's much worse, especially just before a meal. Yeah, we're having fun over here tonight!

You've just ruined my breakfast. Marmite on toast!

Certain people should have more sensitivity for people in different time zones!!

[Moogs]

Originally Posted by Swox These things don't seem so bad if you've just been cutting poop off your cat's bum. That's much worse, especially just before a meal. Yeah, we're having fun over here tonight!

I've had to pull "string poop" out of my dog's butt (after eating part of a towel that she couldn't pass)... does that count?

Anyway I guess my concern is, when you have a group of people who find it righteous / desirable / glorious to die for a cause... annihilation might not be so much a deterrent to them. But I hope you're right and I'm wrong.

[Swox]

Originally Posted by Moogs I've had to pull "string poop" out of my dog's butt (after eating part of a towel that she couldn't pass)... does that count?

Yeah, that'll do.

Anyway I guess my concern is, when you have a group of people who find it righteous / desirable / glorious to die for a cause... annihilation might not be so much a deterrent to them. But I hope you're right and I'm wrong.

Don't you guys just assume that I'm right by now?

I guess I don't worry about it that much because a) I don't worry about hypotheticals that much (though I'm glad that our governments do); and b) the leaders don't want to get killed; it's their lackeys who that do that.

Maybe I'm off on these two points, but it helps me sleep at night, so I go with it.

Oh, and may I add c) I live in Canada. No one dares mess with us.


Oh, and scratt: it's probably for the best. Marmite on toast is basically just a pile of yeast - not a good breakfast (and pretty nasty too - what is it with "savory" food and you limeys? )!

[scratt]

Originally Posted by Swox Oh, and scratt: it's probably for the best. Marmite on toast is basically just a pile of yeast - not a good breakfast (and pretty nasty too - what is it with "savory" food and you limeys? )!

Oh, and Cocoa Puffs were such a frickin' wonderful contribution to the dietary habits of the world!!!