Report: Saudis to Buy Nuke from Pakistan in Response to Iran Deal

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
No worries, both countries are US allies.
 
after following all of the links within the original article and the subsequent sources, the purchase of a weapon is clearly never at issue. the Saudi's would likely purchase the technology and matching # of centerfuges. a cold war on par the US-USSR. the quotes by the Saudi's and other gulf nations certainly echo the displeaser in the terms, but I for one believe we have exhausted the other options short of war, one which would bring the full capabilities of the Shiite terror organizations down open this nations assets abroad and very likely here domestically, if you hated the patriot act, just wait and see which of your own personal freedoms disappear through your governments justifications in this scenario
 
SlyPokerDog said:
Saudi Arabia had made the “strategic decision” to purchase a nuclear weapon from Pakistan
Click to expand...

Obama, one smart dude, hey! Well now the cat is out of the bag, we must built a missile defense system and a briefcase proof immigration system.
I sure hope they base the dart shooters on Navy Destroyers which can double duty on incoming of what ever, where ever needed.
 
MarAzul said:
Obama, one smart dude, hey! Well now the cat is out of the bag, we must built a missile defense system and a briefcase proof immigration system.
I sure hope they base the dart shooters on Navy Destroyers which can double duty on incoming of what ever, where ever needed.
Click to expand...
better have those systems upgraded. terrorist nearly sank the Cole with a rubber raft for a delivery system
 
lawai'a said:
better have those systems upgraded. terrorist nearly sank the Cole with a rubber raft for a delivery system
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with the system. But you need to harden up the rules of engagement, it will hardly do to let a boat load of Arabs paddle up alongside.

Eric Hiscock wrote about that some fifty years ago.

Amazon product ASIN 0713635649
 
MarAzul said:
Nothing wrong with the system. But you need to harden up the rules of engagement, it will hardly do to let a boat load of Arabs paddle up alongside.

Eric Hiscock wrote about that some fifty years ago.

Amazon product ASIN 0713635649
Click to expand...
but will the sailors turn the keys when its a bunch of 12 year olds paddling? accounts from the iran-Iraq war seemed to point to the use of gas by Hussein as a strategic desicion after his soldiers were so demoralized after engaging and killing children that they left their posts on future assaults. I find it hard to believe that American troops would have any less of a conscience or moral objections. I have a hard time believing that our technology will simply defeat their zealotry
 
lawai'a said:
I find it hard to believe that American troops would have any less of a conscience or moral objections.
Click to expand...

Not many men facing a threat will find any moral objection to eliminating the threat. Usually it is the failure to receive the "commence fire" order from above that gums up the works.
In the case of the Cole, there were those onboard that knew they should not permit the unknown boats from closing with their ship, but they could not get authorization to stop it.
That requires a different set of standing orders.

Currently the law, and it must be enforced.
"When you are approaching any U.S. Navy vessel, you must slow to minimum
speed within 500 yards of the vessel. Do not approach within 100 yards of a
U.S. Navy vessel. If you need to pass within 100 yards of a U.S. Navy vessel for
safe passage, you must contact the U.S. Navy vessel or the U.S. Coast Guard
escort vessel on VHF-FM channel 16."
 
thanks though I am quite familiar with the regs. I commercial fish and am often anchored up off of pearl harbor waiting to offload fish at the auction. 100 yards would seem to be mere childsplay for engaging a target as large as most of the vessels stationed there. and I can assure you that permission to encroach on the 100yd no transit zone can be granted with some regularity. and don't even get us started on cruise ships and their no transit zones
 
Last edited:
Well if your the royal family you have to have one of those to add to your collection.
 
lawai'a said:
thanks though I am quite familiar with the regs. I commercial fish and am often anchored up off of pearl harbor waiting to offload fish at the auction. 100 yards would seem to be mere childsplay for engaging a target as large as most of the vessels stationed there. and I can assure you that permission to encroach on the 100yd no transit zone can be granted with some regularity. and don't even get us started on cruise ships and their no transit zones
Click to expand...

SlyPokerDog is mad at you. You killed the ocean with your fishing. It's now dead.
 
If they could just nuke each other instead of us, that would be greaaaaaaaat.
 
Natebishop3 said:
If they could just nuke each other instead of us, that would be greaaaaaaaat.
Click to expand...
detante and mutually assured annihilation/destruction were the catch phrases of Kissinger's foreign policy during the cold war. I would presume that 1 of 2 scenarios would play out. 1.)they realize that pushing the button/turning the keys means the end of both of the offenders cultures so they don't or 2.)
they push the button ending their cultures. Israel is probably a loser in the second scenario also but who ever does it will be a pariah for their actions in the court of world opinion for the fore seeable future. I would be concerned with the possibility of Israel attempting a preemptive(?) nuclear strike making us and them the worlds pariahs
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top