tbrown 26 #1 April 23, 2009 Looks like Pakistan is just a hair away from total collapse, with the Taliban on the march to Islamabad. Looks like the Taliban could finally get their own nuclear arsenal - very soon. Sobering thought.... Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 34 #2 April 23, 2009 Quote Looks like Pakistan is just a hair away from total collapse, with the Taliban on the march to Islamabad. Looks like the Taliban could finally get their own nuclear arsenal - very soon. Sobering thought.... It may be easier for them to fight the Pakistanis than it is to fight the U.S. military in Afghanistan. Something to think about. Maybe now Pakistan will stop complaining about our secret bombing runs over their border? Oh wait... Is that what the Taliban are running from? Taliban + nukes = a very bad idea. "Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #3 April 23, 2009 QuoteLooks like Pakistan is just a hair away from total collapse, with the Taliban on the march to Islamabad. Looks like the Taliban could finally get their own nuclear arsenal - very soon. Sobering thought.... I think the Indians MIGHT have a problem with that Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 34 #4 April 23, 2009 Quote Quote Looks like Pakistan is just a hair away from total collapse, with the Taliban on the march to Islamabad. Looks like the Taliban could finally get their own nuclear arsenal - very soon. Sobering thought.... I think the Indians MIGHT have a problem with that You ain't kidding. It wasn't all that long ago we were faced with a possible nuke war between Pakistan and India. "Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #5 April 23, 2009 QuoteLooks like Pakistan is just a hair away from total collapse, with the Taliban on the march to Islamabad. Looks like the Taliban could finally get their own nuclear arsenal - very soon. Sobering thought.... Good thing this didn't happen a year or two ago. We probably would have invaded Venezuela! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #6 April 23, 2009 QuoteQuoteLooks like Pakistan is just a hair away from total collapse, with the Taliban on the march to Islamabad. Looks like the Taliban could finally get their own nuclear arsenal - very soon. Sobering thought.... Good thing this didn't happen a year or two ago. We probably would have invaded Venezuela! I am completely amazed that we didn't... but I think I know the reason.... Everyone in the Bush Administration had a lifelong phobia of jungles. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Unstable 8 #7 April 23, 2009 You would think that upon immediate collapse of a regime, the outgoing administration would have the sense to scramble/destroy/hide their nuclear arsenal.=========Shaun ========== Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #8 April 23, 2009 Quote You would think that upon immediate collapse of a regime, the outgoing administration would have the sense to scramble/destroy/hide their nuclear arsenal. I think we have people in place for that.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #9 April 23, 2009 >the outgoing administration would have the sense to >scramble/destroy/hide their nuclear arsenal. Unfortunately, the very treaties, security details and safeguards employed to protect said arsenal works against you in that case. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #10 April 23, 2009 QuoteLooks like Pakistan is just a hair away from total collapse, with the Taliban on the march to Islamabad. Looks like the Taliban could finally get their own nuclear arsenal - very soon. Sobering thought.... Quotethe problem is not just Pakistan, it is global. the radical Islamic movement is spreading throughout the world and is taking over in many areas. Pakistan just happens to be the weakest one with nukes. Our problems will get alot worse even if Pakistan doesn't fall to the taliban. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimmytavino 16 #11 April 23, 2009 isn't pakistan the "former Bangladesh"?? dirt poor and in chronic chaos... how did THEY get nuclear technology??? it would be BAD to be put in the spot of having to "nuke them there,,, before they nuke Us here"....could be best to destroy their stockpiles with conventional munitions, rather than allow them to fall into the hands of the taliban.... the first time i heard of these people was when it was reported a decade ago or so, that they were systematically DESTROYING Historical and Significant shrines, buildings, statues, archeological Artifacts, and artistic creations ,, in Afghanistan, and other places.... They are the equivilent of a swarm of mindless locusts... and must be stopped... now we learn how serious a distraction,,, iraq was..... and how it steered us AWAY from applying the needed efforts to squash the vermin,,,,, which the taliban has shown itself to be.....we could have been DONE and outta there by now.... and with B laden in custody, or dead,,, to boot...jt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #12 April 23, 2009 Quote isn't pakistan the "former Bangladesh"?? dirt poor and in chronic chaos... how did THEY get nuclear technology??? it would be BAD to be put in the spot of having to "nuke them there,,, before they nuke Us here"....could be best to destroy their stockpiles with conventional munitions, rather than allow them to fall into the hands of the taliban.... the first time i heard of these people was when it was reported a decade ago or so, that they were systematically DESTROYING Historical and Significant shrines, buildings, statues, archeological Artifacts, and artistic creations ,, in Afghanistan, and other places.... They are the equivilent of a swarm of mindless locusts... and must be stopped... now we learn how serious a distraction,,, iraq was..... and how it steered us AWAY from applying the needed efforts to squash the vermin,,,,, which the taliban has shown itself to be.....we could have been DONE and outta there by now.... and with B laden in custody, or dead,,, to boot...jt No Banglasesh was East Pakistan and they broke away years ago Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #13 April 24, 2009 Quote Looks like Pakistan is just a hair away from total collapse, with the Taliban on the march to Islamabad. Looks like the Taliban could finally get their own nuclear arsenal - very soon. Sobering thought.... I don't know... marching over Islamabad and taking over Pakistan's nuclear arsenal aren't really one in the same event. Picture someone invading Washington successfully and then trying to use the U.S. nuclear arsenal. It's not as easy as it sounds. On top of that, I believe the chain of command from the civilian government down to the "button pressers" in Pakistan is somewhat strange. I doubt TB could order an attack and actually have it happen. (I'm not entirely sure the current government could order an attack and actually have it happen. ) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #14 April 24, 2009 Quote Quote Looks like Pakistan is just a hair away from total collapse, with the Taliban on the march to Islamabad. Looks like the Taliban could finally get their own nuclear arsenal - very soon. Sobering thought.... I don't know... marching over Islamabad and taking over Pakistan's nuclear arsenal aren't really one in the same event. Picture someone invading Washington successfully and then trying to use the U.S. nuclear arsenal. It's not as easy as it sounds. On top of that, I believe the chain of command from the civilian government down to the "button pressers" in Pakistan is somewhat strange. I doubt TB could order an attack and actually have it happen. (I'm not entirely sure the current government could order an attack and actually have it happen. ) The best western estimates are that the (Pakistani) Army has control (of the nuclear weapons). Regardless, Pakistani Taliban in control is not a positive development. ---- --- -- --- ---- I’m slightly annoyed that I missed David Kilcullen and LTG Barno’s (ret) testimony to the HASC on “Effective Counterinsurgency: The Future of the U.S.-Pakistan Military Partnership.” HASC only does live video/audio casts ... Found the video! Statement from the ranking majority member Statement from ranking minority member And RUMINT (rumor) is that Kilcullen (retired Australian Army officer) used the phrase “and kick your ass” in open session to describe the indirect rulership bargain between the Pakistanis and the tribal leaders. !!! /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #15 April 24, 2009 Quote Quote On top of that, I believe the chain of command from the civilian government down to the "button pressers" in Pakistan is somewhat strange. I doubt TB could order an attack and actually have it happen. (I'm not entirely sure the current government could order an attack and actually have it happen. ) The best western estimates are that the (Pakistani) Army has control (of the nuclear weapons). Yeah... I was trying to make sense of this article before I wrote my post but then decided calling it "somewhat strange" would have to do. Quote I’m slightly annoyed that I missed David Kilcullen and LTG Barno’s (ret) testimony to the HASC... ...found the video! Sweet. Will watch. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 126 #16 April 24, 2009 I have said it for years - I have no idea why Pakistan is our ally....... Sadly, they might give a shot, but simply do not have the resources to deal with their own problems. Yet they have nuclear weapons...... wow Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #17 April 25, 2009 >I have no idea why Pakistan is our ally . . . . You hit on the reason in the line below: > Yet they have nuclear weapons...... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Frenchy68 0 #18 April 25, 2009 QuoteI have no idea why Pakistan is our ally....... Because they were opposed to India, which was in friendly terms with the USSR. "The enemy of my enemy's friend is my friend..." "For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #19 April 25, 2009 QuoteLooks like Pakistan is just a hair away from total collapse, with the Taliban on the march to Islamabad. Looks like the Taliban could finally get their own nuclear arsenal - very soon. Sobering thought.... No more than the British taking over the US in 1812 - you know they burned down the White House, don't you? Islamabad isn't the country of Pakistan, it's one city, and the nuclear weapons are broken into pieces and scattered over many areas that are not under Taliban control. I doubt that any terrorist groups will be in control of nukes from this scenario.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #20 April 25, 2009 Quote David Kilcullen and LTG Barno’s (ret) testimony to the HASC on “Effective Counterinsurgency: The Future of the U.S.-Pakistan Military Partnership.” Rep Bartlett (MD) asked LTG David Barno, USA (ret), who former commander of US forces in Afghanistan; former LTC David Kilcullen, PhD, Australian Army, who is an expert in counterinsurgency theory, doctrine, and operations and worked closely w/GEN Petraeus on his application of COIN strategy, which is better known as “the Surge” in the US; and Mr. Shuja Nawaz, Director of South Asia Center, the Atlantic Council (I’d never heard of him before, he’s apparently the South Asia expert) to each “prognosticate” on the probability of the 3 potential outcomes for Pakistan (that LTG Barno suggested in his opening statement): (1) failed state, (2) stalemate/status quo, or (3) gradual improvement. The 3 provided their prognostications: Barno: failed state 15%, stalemate/status quo 60%, gradual improvement 25% Kilcullen: failed state 75%, stalemate/status quo 0%, gradual improvement 25% Nawaz: failed state 15%, stalemate/status quo 55%, gradual improvement 30% Kilcullen is clearly the pessimist. In his response, he asserts that the current weak central government, advancing Pakistani Taliban (not the exact same as Afghan Taliban), and other domestic tensions are too great for the “status quo” to persist. And Kilcullen, as he frequently does, provides the most incisive lines: “coalition of the angry” to describe Pakistanis. He asserts repeatedly the “the whole approach [by the US and allies] has been flawed from the outset.” His recommendations, in line with the House Resolution being considered (hence the hearing), were very much in line with counterinsurgency theory: “focus on protecting the population” over “kinetic operations” (aka bombs) and “build up civil authorities.” Concur strongly with Kilcullen’s assertion (~1:16), with which Barno also concurred, that we need a strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan. Not tactics. Not operational planning. A strategy. Strategy is not a bunch of operational tactics strung together like a Christmas tree lights. Kilcullen and Barno did disagree strongly w/r/t use and effectiveness of drones deployed from Afghanistan into the Pakistan border. Kilcullen describes them as “robots in the air” and asserts that it makes the US apper weak from a tribal culture perspective. Barno argues that they are being disruptive of al Qa’eda & Pakistani Taliban. Kilcullen and Barno emphasized the need for longterm stability, transition, and reconstruction for Pakistan. All three men were also quite explicit that Pakistan is not Afghanistan. Pakistan has a robust middle class - they cite 30M, which corresponds to ~20% of the population. Pakistan does have a robust, functioning modern Army. Pakistan has robust urban centers rather than a predominently rural population. From those perspective/demographics, Pakistan shares more with Hussayn-era Iraq (significant middle clas; modern Army, and urban population) than it does with Afghanistan. (The same can be said of Pakistan and lots of other states as well, i.e., that's not to draw parallels between the governments of Iraq pre-OIF and Pakistan.) Starting ~53:30 – LTG Barno (aka my “older guy in a suit” hero at the Air War College last week ) discusses why addressing India is strategically critical and the important role for essentially Track II & III diplomatic efforts (educational, scientific, and business) in South Asia that has not been pursued for a long time with Pakistan. Barno doesn’t use the words Track II diplomacy, but that’s what he describes. Barno noted that there is a need for a comprehensive Afghanistan-Pakistan-India strategy. It was the best analysis of what is going on in Pakistan, in the region and the regional connections, and US options that I have encountered. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #21 April 25, 2009 I think you and I know what should be done Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #22 April 25, 2009 Quote Quote Quote On top of that, I believe the chain of command from the civilian government down to the "button pressers" in Pakistan is somewhat strange. I doubt TB could order an attack and actually have it happen. (I'm not entirely sure the current government could order an attack and actually have it happen. ) The best western estimates are that the (Pakistani) Army has control (of the nuclear weapons). Yeah... I was trying to make sense of this article before I wrote my post but then decided calling it "somewhat strange" would have to do. Dr. George Perkovich is arguably the leading expert on Pakistan's nuclear weapons, outside of the USG. Inside the USG, the leading expert is arguably Dr. Peter Lavoy, on leave from the Naval Postgraduate School as acting chair of the National Intelligence Council (NIC). Not unsurprisingly, can't find any recent statements attributed to him ... anything the DNI releases is likely to have Lavoy's metaphorical fingerprints all over it. Perkovich was is quoted in an article released today on control of the nuclear weapons and the Pakistani Taliban: “‘I would say that I thought [the threat] was exaggerated -- that there were 10 or 12 other [threats] in Pakistan that were more probable and were also very grave – [but] it’s gotten much worse in the last few years, and you have a sense of parts of Pakistan now becoming ungovernable by the Pakistani state,’ Perkovich says. ‘Today I'm feeling like we really, really have to focus on the nuclear danger in a way that I wouldn't have said was the case until recently. It's not an exaggeration to say that there is a risk.’ “Most experts say they have no doubt that Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is now under tight control by Pakistan's Strategic Plan Division -- the security structure headed by 58-year-old General Khalid Kidwai and intended to keep the weapons from falling into the hands of Islamic militants, Al-Qaeda scientists, or Indian saboteurs. “Perkovich says current safeguards should ensure that any possible collapse of the civilian government in Islamabad would not affect the security of Pakistan's nuclear weapons -- at least, he says, as long as General Kidwai remains in control. “‘The civil government is not relevant to the control of nuclear weapons in Pakistan; it is entirely an army issue,’ Perkovich says. “We do have a strong sense that [Pakistan’s nuclear weapons] are controlled by elements in the army that have been selected and are reliable. As long as that control by this current military leadership remains strong, then I think one can have pretty good confidence that these weapons won't be used crazily.’ “But Perkovich says his concern centers around what could happen if pro-Islamist elements within Pakistan's military and security forces turned against Kidwai. (Estimates of radical Islamists infiltration of military varies. I’ve heard as high as 75% but that’s usually as the ‘ground soldier’ level rather than general officer. Most estimates I hear still consider the Pakistani General Officer corps to be highly dependable, westernized, non-Islamic fundamentalists. One has to dive deep into the structure to really appreciate how those positions are tightly controlled and class-dependent, including by familial relations and history as factors – nerdgirl.) “‘The risk on the nuclear side is that the country falls apart or has a civil war that the bad guys win,’ Perkovich says. ‘The fear comes if there is a coup within the military so that, somehow, the people now in charge within the military get dispossessed of their nuclear weapons by other people in the military who would be less responsible.’ [I.e., Kilcullen’s 75% failed state prognostication if current policies do not change – nerdgirl.] “To that ‘first fear,’ however, Perkovich adds another alarming scenario: ‘The second fear is [if] there is basically just a takeover by the Taliban and somehow the military crumbles and flees.’ So there is legitimate reason for concern, i.e., worst case scenarios are not close to zero probability. And at the same time, the worst case scenario probablitly, while still very low, is increasing. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #23 April 25, 2009 Quote... and the nuclear weapons are broken into pieces and scattered over many areas that are not under Taliban control. The fissile cores and the non-nuclear components of the weapons, as well as ballistic missiles, are reportedly stored separately. The main reason Pakistan did that was not to secure against theft by insurgent Taliban (or others) but as an insurance that a deterrent or response capability would remain if India tried to take out Pakistan's nuclear weapons capabilities. That policy was instituted in response to a specific external, state-based threat. The threat has changed. Is that still the best policy? Are multiple stores of fissile material the best policy for securing that material from a domestic insurgency? /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #24 April 25, 2009 Quotehow did THEY get nuclear technology??? Through a sub-state actor: AQ Khan. Brief synopsis: Khan is a metallurgist or materials scientist (not a nuclear physicist or engineer) who spent a great deal of time in the 1970s making friends and business contacts with legitimate researchers and businesses in Europe. Leveraging those connections, he established a transnational clandestine network relying on front-companies to bring together the knowledge, materials, and infrastructure to build the capacity for Pakistan to enrich uranium. Enriching uranium is hard (technically challnging); the design of a uranium-based weapon is comparatively easy. It's (roughly) the inverse for plutonium. (And this is why folks are concerned with Iran & its centrifuges.) He became the "father" of Pakistan's nuclear bomb. Whether or not and the extent to which the Pakistani government, the Pakistani Army, &/or the ISI (Pakistani intelligence service) knew about Khan's activities is still debated. The Pakistani government denies knowing about it ... yet he used government planes to move large equipment. I'm not confident to assert that the Pakistani government gave Khan explicit instructions or permission. I see little evidence to suggest that there was not tacit approval. He also was willing to work with, buy from, sell to other states (DPRK, Libya, Iran). What AQ Khan illustrates is the ability of a well-connected individual to exploit the benefits of globalization for purposes that many consider detrimental to international security. Altho' many/most Pakistanis regard him as a national hero. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #25 May 11, 2009 Excellent investigative journalism on Pakistani Taliban with specific emphasis on recruitment/indoctrination of young boys, including as suicide bombers; efforts to eliminate education for young girls; imposition of Sharia' (religious-based) law; efforts to undermine local civil-based law enforcement (e.g., decapitated police officer hung in town center w/sign indicating anyone who removes him will also be killed likewise); and instability of current government: PBS Frontline’s Pakistan: Children of the Taliban. Also effectively illustrative of how hard it is to win against an insurgency. Comment from the Frontline segment that most struck me ... because I see so much anti-intellectualism in the US today and voiced not infrequently here: “Because education is like a ray of light and I want that light.” 9-year old girl in Swat Valley whose school was destroyed by Pakistani Taliban. She gets it. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
