Nuclear proliferation
-
Michael Martin wrote: He was in a part of the world with oil which is what y'all really give a sh*t about. So when do we get the cheaper gas now that we got our oil? :-D ~Nitron.
ññòòïðïðB A
start -
Even if you're potentially right (my knowledge on this subject is too limited to be more affirmative), I don't see how this could be an apology for the behaviour of ISI, especially with its relationship with Al-qaeda.
Le temps se perd, "Si" n'existe pas Tous les remords n'y changeront rien Le temps se perd, "Si" n'existe pas Donc à présent le choix reste mien
Ka?l wrote: I don't see how this could be an apology for the behaviour of ISI, especially with its relationship with Al-qaeda. Those Talibans + Al-Qaida were completely supported by USA to fight against Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Am i wrong ?? And ofcourse ISI was also involved in that war, so the ties of ISI with Talibans were since that time. After the war, USA left Afghanistan as a gift for Talibans. With the passage of time, the relations b/w Talibans and US were getting strained, however the relations b/w Talibans and ISI were not getting bad. Also USA betrayed Pakistan by taking the money for F-16s and then refuse to supply them. After September 11, even ISI left Talibans alone because of US pressure (yes there were some pro-taliban elements and still are). Also the relations b/w ISI and Taliban gang further worsen when those people were found responsible for killing French engineers in Pakistan. Those engineers were working in Pakistan on a joint Naval Sub-Marine project. However, French Government didn't closed the project and sent the new team. The project is complete now. France is a very important and sensitive friend of Pakistan and so ISI was unhappy with those killing of engineers. Now the condition is that ISI itself blames Taliban related elements for bombing Musharraf twice. May be whatever i wrote above is wrong. This is what my personal opinion after reading news papers, or media reports e.t.c.
-
Christian Graus wrote: just a lot of people within the USA are pretty damn stupid. Yeah, no other countries have stupid people.:doh:
Yes we do, but we keep them where we can keep an eye on them - in Slough. ;P Anna :rose: Homepage | Tears and Laughter "Be yourself - not what others think you should be" - Marcia Graesch "Anna's just a sexy-looking lesbian tart" - A friend, trying to wind me up. It didn't work. Trouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Visual C++ Add-In
-
yeah pakisthan is actually the center of terror, but USA turns a blind eye on them because, USA considers pakis as stratigic state in the southasia. Programming is an art not a skill, every one can be a skilled programmer but not an artist.
IT IS INDIA , not the PAKISTAN which is center of terror.. the terror they have created in State of Jammu and kashmir, supressing innocent people to live under their rule without their will, killing dozens of innocent kashmiris daily.. PAKISTAN has to work on NUCLEAR weapons just becuase of these terrorist acts of INDIA; to defend itself against any such evil power. and talking about USA, why dont they take any action against ISRAEL when it is supressing people of palestine???? Muhammad Shoaib Khan http://geocities.com/lansolution
-
IT IS INDIA , not the PAKISTAN which is center of terror.. the terror they have created in State of Jammu and kashmir, supressing innocent people to live under their rule without their will, killing dozens of innocent kashmiris daily.. PAKISTAN has to work on NUCLEAR weapons just becuase of these terrorist acts of INDIA; to defend itself against any such evil power. and talking about USA, why dont they take any action against ISRAEL when it is supressing people of palestine???? Muhammad Shoaib Khan http://geocities.com/lansolution
"IT IS INDIA , not the PAKISTAN which is center of terror" How many ppl belive that may be pakisthan and osama bin ladin. "PAKISTAN has to work on NUCLEAR weapons just becuase of these terrorist acts of INDIA" yeah to give it to other terrorist. "talking about USA, why dont they take any action against ISRAEL when it is supressing people of palestine????" you got that rite. Programming is an art not a skill, every one can be a skilled programmer but not an artist.
-
I actually find myself agreeing with what appears to be world opinion on this one, and disagree with the Bush administation's overall strategy. If Saddam didn't have nuclear weapons it is only because Pakistan had not gotten around to helping them out yet - being too busy helping out so many others. If we were going to fight a war against the source of 9/11 type terror (which, lets face the truth, effectively means a war on Islam itself), Pakistan should have been one of our first targets, not one of our allies.
Stan Shannon wrote: If we were going to fight a war against the source of 9/11 type terror (which, lets face the truth, effectively means a war on Islam itself How do u relate 9/11 and islam?? Islam strongly condemns killing innocent people as in 9/11 case. According to islam a killer of innocent person (be it christian or muslim) is sentenced to death.. btw who in this world give this right that US can have nuclear weapons which she can use against Japan ( a terrorist act), but Pakistan, Iran or any other state can't have??? you call Iran terrorist because she is against Israel???? Why US helps Israel in its terrorist acts agaisnt palestinian people??? isnt it the terrorist act of US that it invaded Iraq despite it couldnt find ANY SINGLE WMD?? Muhammad Shoaib Khan http://geocities.com/lansolution
-
Ka?l wrote: I don't see how this could be an apology for the behaviour of ISI, especially with its relationship with Al-qaeda. Those Talibans + Al-Qaida were completely supported by USA to fight against Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Am i wrong ?? And ofcourse ISI was also involved in that war, so the ties of ISI with Talibans were since that time. After the war, USA left Afghanistan as a gift for Talibans. With the passage of time, the relations b/w Talibans and US were getting strained, however the relations b/w Talibans and ISI were not getting bad. Also USA betrayed Pakistan by taking the money for F-16s and then refuse to supply them. After September 11, even ISI left Talibans alone because of US pressure (yes there were some pro-taliban elements and still are). Also the relations b/w ISI and Taliban gang further worsen when those people were found responsible for killing French engineers in Pakistan. Those engineers were working in Pakistan on a joint Naval Sub-Marine project. However, French Government didn't closed the project and sent the new team. The project is complete now. France is a very important and sensitive friend of Pakistan and so ISI was unhappy with those killing of engineers. Now the condition is that ISI itself blames Taliban related elements for bombing Musharraf twice. May be whatever i wrote above is wrong. This is what my personal opinion after reading news papers, or media reports e.t.c.
Shah Shehpori wrote: Those Talibans + Al-Qaida were completely supported by USA to fight against Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Am i wrong ?? No, you aren't, but I don't se how the involvment of the US in such operations can constitute a moral ground. Moreover, the US have paid the price for this alliance with the "devil". Shah Shehpori wrote: , French Government didn't closed the project and sent the new team. I know that, and I strongly condemn it. I know economic motives push to sell weapons worldwide, but it's not a reason to arm undemocratic and possibly rogue states. It's the same mistake than when selling weapons to Saddam during the 80's. Shah Shehpori wrote: May be whatever i wrote above is wrong. This is what my personal opinion after reading news papers, or media reports e.t.c The same for me :)
Le temps se perd, "Si" n'existe pas Tous les remords n'y changeront rien Le temps se perd, "Si" n'existe pas Donc à présent le choix reste mien
-
Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations organization charged with monitoring nuclear energy worldwide, contends that the recent nuclear disclosures show that the system put in place at the height of the cold war to contain nuclear weapons technology has ruptured and can no longer control the new nuclear trade. ... In the years before Pakistan's first test in 1998, Dr. Khan and his team began publishing papers in the global scientific literature on how to make and test its uranium centrifuges. In the West, these publications would have been classified secret or top secret. But Dr. Khan made no secret of his motive: he boasted in print of circumventing the restrictions of the Western nuclear powers, declaring in a 1987 paper that he sought to pierce "the clouds of the so-called secrecy." ... Dr. Khan, a fervent nationalist, has condemned the system that limits legal nuclear knowledge to the five major nuclear powers, or that has ignored Israel's nuclear weapon while focusing on the fear of an Islamic bomb. "All Western countries," he was once quoted as saying, "are not only the enemies of Pakistan but in fact of Islam." :mad: Looks like Dr. Khan (father of the Pakistani nuclear program) is connected to the nuclear programs of North Korea, China, Iran, Iraq, and Libya. There's been allegations (in other articles) that he was connected to Al-Queda's nuclear aspirations. From Rogue Nuclear Programs, Web of Trails Leads to Pakistan[^] ------------------------------------------ Law of Nazi Analogies: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one. In any debate, Hitler's opinion on the subject is automatically the evil one, so it had better be contrary to the side you're arguing.
Brit wrote: Looks like Dr. Khan (father of the Pakistani nuclear program) is connected to the nuclear programs of North Korea, China, Iran, Iraq, and Libya. I wish all of them have nuclear bombs and they declare it .. so that there is peace in US's dumb ASSSS.. if US has right to have Nuclear bombs then y dont any other country has the same right??? everyone has a right to defend itself.. US couldnt find even single WMD in Iraq. If Iraq had nuclear weapons, US would have never invaded it because of fear. So now NUKES are becoming necessary for one's sovereignity.. Muhammad Shoaib Khan http://geocities.com/lansolution
-
Ka?l wrote: I don't see how this could be an apology for the behaviour of ISI, especially with its relationship with Al-qaeda. Those Talibans + Al-Qaida were completely supported by USA to fight against Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Am i wrong ?? And ofcourse ISI was also involved in that war, so the ties of ISI with Talibans were since that time. After the war, USA left Afghanistan as a gift for Talibans. With the passage of time, the relations b/w Talibans and US were getting strained, however the relations b/w Talibans and ISI were not getting bad. Also USA betrayed Pakistan by taking the money for F-16s and then refuse to supply them. After September 11, even ISI left Talibans alone because of US pressure (yes there were some pro-taliban elements and still are). Also the relations b/w ISI and Taliban gang further worsen when those people were found responsible for killing French engineers in Pakistan. Those engineers were working in Pakistan on a joint Naval Sub-Marine project. However, French Government didn't closed the project and sent the new team. The project is complete now. France is a very important and sensitive friend of Pakistan and so ISI was unhappy with those killing of engineers. Now the condition is that ISI itself blames Taliban related elements for bombing Musharraf twice. May be whatever i wrote above is wrong. This is what my personal opinion after reading news papers, or media reports e.t.c.
You go anywhere east west north or south hunting for terrorist at the end of the list you will find pakisthan as terror state. Just like USA is turning a blind eye on isreal it is doing it with pak also. Programming is an art not a skill, every one can be a skilled programmer but not an artist.
-
Brit wrote: Looks like Dr. Khan (father of the Pakistani nuclear program) is connected to the nuclear programs of North Korea, China, Iran, Iraq, and Libya. I wish all of them have nuclear bombs and they declare it .. so that there is peace in US's dumb ASSSS.. if US has right to have Nuclear bombs then y dont any other country has the same right??? everyone has a right to defend itself.. US couldnt find even single WMD in Iraq. If Iraq had nuclear weapons, US would have never invaded it because of fear. So now NUKES are becoming necessary for one's sovereignity.. Muhammad Shoaib Khan http://geocities.com/lansolution
M.Shoaib Khan wrote: If Iraq had nuclear weapons, US would have never invaded it because of fear. Oil's thicker than blood my friend. Appearently we must want it more than anything else, so I'd be hard pressed to believe nukes would have stopped us from taking our oil! Oh wait, that was supposed to be a quote for the guardian, sorry. ~Nitron.
ññòòïðïðB A
start -
Daniel Ferguson wrote: There are strong Christian religious leaders even in the US who preach hatred and divisiveness on teevee and radio programs. I would challenge you to name a single Christian minister of any kind of national prominence who publically advocates violence or hatred. The one or two you might mention do nothing more than preach. If they acted on those beliefs they would quickly find out how little we as a civilization, tolerate such behavior. To indicate that there is somehow an equivalency between the two cultures because there are a few vocal Christian ministers, none of whom advocate any kind of violence, compared to a very large percentage of Muslim ministers who are advocating violence of the most extreme sort, is rediculous. Aside from that, I'm sure everything you say is reasonably valid. I'm sure that most Muslims are just people who want to get through the day as peaceably and profitably as possible, just as people are everywhere. However, none of that matters if their culture is too incompentent or unwilling to deal with the few are not so mild mannered. If they can't do it, we must, and that "effectively" means a war against Islam, because it is those few, and not the many, who are effectively defining what Islam is. If the Muslim majority desires some other definition of what Islam is than it is their responsibility to do it, not mine and not yours.
Stan Shannon wrote: I would challenge you to name a single Christian minister of any kind of national prominence who publically advocates violence or hatred. Here's Pat Robertson concluding that nuking the State Department is "the answer": http://edition.cnn.com/2003/US/10/09/robertson.state/. Then there Fred Phelps. He's mostly known for being a lunatic, but what he preaches isn't so far outside the mainstream of the religious right. i'm not gonna claim this compares to the level of stuff coming out of radical islam. but, stupid appeals to violence are a universal... ClickPic | ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
-
Excuse me for being suspicious. I have had the growing feeling for a long time now that the left is using the fact of Islamic terrorism as a means of attacking Chrisitanity by artificially associating the two as some how equivalent in their ultimate goals. The irony of it all is that the only group using political power to force a moral agenda onto our culture is the left itself, makeing them the closest equivalent in our culture to what is coming out of Islam. (Not to imply they are in any way actually guilty of terrorism) In fact, if you really think about it, this conflict is between the two most absolutist sources of moral authoritarianism in the world today - the human secularism of the left in the west and the Islamic Fundamentalism of the middle east. Christianity, as such, hardly has a role at all. (This is all doubly ironic when you stop to consider that the guy who the left hates the most, GWB, is doing the most to defend it.)
Stan Shannon wrote: I have had the growing feeling for a long time now that the left is using the fact of Islamic terrorism as a means of attacking Chrisitanity by artificially associating the two as some how equivalent in their ultimate goals. whew, talk about "artificial association" ! and, BTW, what exactly are the "ultimate goals" of the left ? "attacking Chrisitanity" ? who is ? how ? where ? Stan Shannon wrote: The irony of it all is that the only group using political power to force a moral agenda onto our culture is the left itself "religious right" = morality + political affiliation ClickPic | ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
-
Christian Graus wrote: just a lot of people within the USA are pretty damn stupid. Yeah, no other countries have stupid people.:doh:
where did he say that? ClickPic | ImgSource | CheeseWeasle
-
Yes we do, but we keep them where we can keep an eye on them - in Slough. ;P Anna :rose: Homepage | Tears and Laughter "Be yourself - not what others think you should be" - Marcia Graesch "Anna's just a sexy-looking lesbian tart" - A friend, trying to wind me up. It didn't work. Trouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Visual C++ Add-In
-
At the risk of cementing my reputation as a "Stupid American", i must ask - surely you mean something other than "we keep our stupid people in the swamp"...? :~ Z
no one puts flowers
on a flower's grave
Shog9 wrote: At the risk of cementing my reputation as a "Stupid American", i must ask - surely you mean something other than "we keep our stupid people in the swamp"...? Nope. There's a town called Slough not too far out of London. I myself live just far enough away from it not to be affected by the stupid-radiation-field caused by the inhabitants :-) Slough is also the locale for the BBC comedy "The Office" :-D But to be fair, I don't think most Brits want to know about Slough, so an American not knowing about it at all isn't really a sign of stupidity :-) -- Ian Darling "The moral of the story is that with a contrived example, you can prove anything." - Joel Spolsky
-
At the risk of cementing my reputation as a "Stupid American", i must ask - surely you mean something other than "we keep our stupid people in the swamp"...? :~ Z
no one puts flowers
on a flower's grave
http://www.slough.gov.uk/[^] I rest my case. Forget the flashy council website, visit the place and you'll see why Sir John Betjeman[^] didn't think much of it. P.S. I used to live in Maidenhead (lit: where we keep female virgins until they're old enough to venture out) so I'm of course biased... ;P Anna :rose: Homepage | Tears and Laughter "Be yourself - not what others think you should be" - Marcia Graesch "Anna's just a sexy-looking lesbian tart" - A friend, trying to wind me up. It didn't work. Trouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Visual C++ Add-In
-
http://www.slough.gov.uk/[^] I rest my case. Forget the flashy council website, visit the place and you'll see why Sir John Betjeman[^] didn't think much of it. P.S. I used to live in Maidenhead (lit: where we keep female virgins until they're old enough to venture out) so I'm of course biased... ;P Anna :rose: Homepage | Tears and Laughter "Be yourself - not what others think you should be" - Marcia Graesch "Anna's just a sexy-looking lesbian tart" - A friend, trying to wind me up. It didn't work. Trouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Visual C++ Add-In
Anna-Jayne Metcalfe wrote: _http://www.slough.gov.uk/\[^\]_ Yuck :-) It's like being stuck in bad childrens TV, but has no redeeming features whatsoever, like Gordon The Gopher -- Ian Darling "The moral of the story is that with a contrived example, you can prove anything." - Joel Spolsky
-
Anna-Jayne Metcalfe wrote: _http://www.slough.gov.uk/\[^\]_ Yuck :-) It's like being stuck in bad childrens TV, but has no redeeming features whatsoever, like Gordon The Gopher -- Ian Darling "The moral of the story is that with a contrived example, you can prove anything." - Joel Spolsky
LMAO! :laugh: And the worst bit is what you see is only the beginning. Scary. :~ Anna :rose: Homepage | Tears and Laughter "Be yourself - not what others think you should be" - Marcia Graesch "Anna's just a sexy-looking lesbian tart" - A friend, trying to wind me up. It didn't work. Trouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Visual C++ Add-In
-
Brit wrote: Looks like Dr. Khan (father of the Pakistani nuclear program) is connected to the nuclear programs of North Korea, China, Iran, Iraq, and Libya. I wish all of them have nuclear bombs and they declare it .. so that there is peace in US's dumb ASSSS.. if US has right to have Nuclear bombs then y dont any other country has the same right??? everyone has a right to defend itself.. US couldnt find even single WMD in Iraq. If Iraq had nuclear weapons, US would have never invaded it because of fear. So now NUKES are becoming necessary for one's sovereignity.. Muhammad Shoaib Khan http://geocities.com/lansolution
Yes, you're right. Why shouldn't the world's most volatile region have nukes? Just because it's ruled by a rotating sequence of dictators, theocracies, and extremists is no reason they shouldn't have nukes. Just because Saddam Hussein kills hundreds of thousands of his own people doesn't mean he can't be trusted with nukes. Just because Syria killed 30,000+ people in the city of Hama[^ doesn't mean they aren't responsible leaders. Here in the US, we allow people to have guns. But we don't allow felons to have guns. Now, I'm sure that, just like you, the felons are complaining "This is bullshit. Other people get to have guns." You don't have to be a brain surgeon to realize how straight forward and levelheaded the "felons cannot have guns" idea is. Yet, when it comes to the idea of nukes in the Middle East, you all want to say, "This is bullshit. Other people get to have nukes." And it sounds just as stupid as when the felons say it. If you'd pull your head out of your ass long enough to notice that you're only acting on nationalistic tendencies, rather than any approximation of logic you'd know that nuclear proliferation is a problem and nuclear proliferation in the Middle East is the biggest part of that problem. ------------------------------------------ Law of Nazi Analogies: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one. In any debate, Hitler's opinion on the subject is automatically the evil one, so it had better be contrary to the side you're arguing.
-
Yes, you're right. Why shouldn't the world's most volatile region have nukes? Just because it's ruled by a rotating sequence of dictators, theocracies, and extremists is no reason they shouldn't have nukes. Just because Saddam Hussein kills hundreds of thousands of his own people doesn't mean he can't be trusted with nukes. Just because Syria killed 30,000+ people in the city of Hama[^ doesn't mean they aren't responsible leaders. Here in the US, we allow people to have guns. But we don't allow felons to have guns. Now, I'm sure that, just like you, the felons are complaining "This is bullshit. Other people get to have guns." You don't have to be a brain surgeon to realize how straight forward and levelheaded the "felons cannot have guns" idea is. Yet, when it comes to the idea of nukes in the Middle East, you all want to say, "This is bullshit. Other people get to have nukes." And it sounds just as stupid as when the felons say it. If you'd pull your head out of your ass long enough to notice that you're only acting on nationalistic tendencies, rather than any approximation of logic you'd know that nuclear proliferation is a problem and nuclear proliferation in the Middle East is the biggest part of that problem. ------------------------------------------ Law of Nazi Analogies: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one. In any debate, Hitler's opinion on the subject is automatically the evil one, so it had better be contrary to the side you're arguing.
u people call yourself responsible???? huh... targeting Japan's two cities with your NUKES?? US is supporting ISRAEL to kill innocent child in palestine.[^] ISRAEL has nukes but u dont bother about it.. u call them responsible???????????? huh shame on you.. why do u call IRAN irresponsible?? just because they dont give a shit to you.. or they openly apppose Israeli policies.. The university where i am studying was founded by Dr. Khan i.e Father of Pakistani Nuclear bomb.. and i personally know people from Pakistan Atomic Energy commission who were somehow associated with Pakistan's nuclear program.. and i feel proud of them. US imposed sanctions on my univ in past due to link with Pakistani Nuclear program and research work done on missile and nuclear tech in univ (according to them).. There is not even a single course on nuclear physics taught in this univ.. NOW people from here are serving around the world.. and yes i am proud of this connection.. Muhammad Shoaib Khan http://geocities.com/lansolution