:bleeding: :bleeding: :bleeding: :bleeding: :bleeding:
http://www.thetower.org/2046-report-saudis-to-buy-nuke-from-pakistan-in-response-to-iran-deal/
QuoteUS officials: 'Saudis set to buy nuclear weapons from Pakistan'
By Yasmin Kaye
May 17, 2015 16:49 BST
Saudi Arabia is said to have taken the "strategic decision" to acquire "off-the-shelf" nuclear weapons from ally Pakistan, senior US officials told the Sunday Times.
Sunni Arab states are increasingly concerned of the repercussions of a deal currently being negotiated between world powers and Shi'ite rival Iran, which they fear may still be able to develop a nuclear bomb.
The deal being negotiated between Iran and the permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany would see the Shi'ite nation curb its sensitive nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief.
"For the Saudis the moment has come," a former US defence official told the Sunday Times last week.
"There has been a long-standing agreement in place with the Pakistanis and the House of Saud has now made the strategic decision to move forward."
'This stuff is available to them off the shelf'
Another US official working in intelligence told the paper that "hundreds of people at [CIA headquarters] Langley" were working to establish whether Islamabad had already supplied the Gulf nation with nuclear technology or weaponry.
"We know this stuff is available to them off the shelf," the intelligence official said, adding that it "has to be the assumption" that the Saudis have decided to become a nuclear power.
"We can't sit back and be nowhere as Iran is allowed to retain much of its capability and amass its research," an Arab leader preparing to meet Obama told the New York Times on Monday (11 May).
The sentiment was shared by former Saudi intelligence chief Prince Turki bin Faisal, who told a recent conference in South Korea: "whatever the Iranians have, we will have, too."
The right to enrich uranium
If inked the deal will leave 5,000 centrifuges and a research and development programme in place — features that are highly contested by Israel and Arab states.
By allowing Iran to retain the right to enrich uranium, the deal may inadvertently increase nuclear proliferation in the region, by providing justification for other Middle Eastern countries to match Iran.
Saudi Arabia has financed substantial amounts of Islamabad's nuclear programme over the past three decades, providing Pakistan's government with billions of dollars of subsidised oil while taking delivery of Shaheen mobile ballistic missiles.
"Given their close relations and close military links, it's long been assumed that if the Saudis wanted, they would call in a commitment, moral or otherwise, for Pakistan to supply them immediately with nuclear warheads," former Foreign Secretary Lord David Owen told the Sunday Times.
A senior British military officer also told the paper that Western military leaders "all assume the Saudis have made the decision to go nuclear."
"The fear is that other Middle Eastern powers — Turkey and Egypt — may feel compelled to do the same and we will see a new, even more dangerous, arms race."
Lt.Gen. Khalid Kidwai, who helped develop Pakistan's nuclear program, denied Islamabad had ever sent nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia or any other country in recent comments.
Oh no, this could result in the Middle Eastern countries annihilating each other completely in a mutually assured destruction nuclear exchange. :hmm:
Quote from: Martinus on May 18, 2015, 03:33:43 AM
Oh no, this could result in the Middle Eastern countries annihilating each other completely in a mutually assured destruction nuclear exchange. :hmm:
Oh noes :(
This could result in a lot of things.
Quote from: Tamas on May 18, 2015, 03:54:19 AM
Quote from: Martinus on May 18, 2015, 03:33:43 AM
Oh no, this could result in the Middle Eastern countries annihilating each other completely in a mutually assured destruction nuclear exchange. :hmm:
Oh noes :(
Considering that studies say that even a limited nuclear exchange could severely affect global radiation levels and climate, I'd say "Oh noes" indeed.
Quote from: Syt on May 18, 2015, 04:23:32 AM
Quote from: Tamas on May 18, 2015, 03:54:19 AM
Quote from: Martinus on May 18, 2015, 03:33:43 AM
Oh no, this could result in the Middle Eastern countries annihilating each other completely in a mutually assured destruction nuclear exchange. :hmm:
Oh noes :(
Considering that studies say that even a limited nuclear exchange could severely affect global radiation levels and climate, I'd say "Oh noes" indeed.
US and USSR tested a thousand warheads between us, an exchange between the Arabs and Iranians will not have any where that number.
http://www.ippnw.org/nuclear-famine.html
I think the real worry for the Western world would be the presently unimaginable level of refugees and utter chaos in a huge region even with a conventional war, let alone a nuclear exchange.
I wonder how the Iranian leadership managed to so neatly mousetrap Saudi Arabia into willingly advancing the interests of the Iranian radicals. Iran now isn't developing a destabilizing bomb, it is merely restoring the balance after the Saudis acquired nuclear weapons.
If brains were dynamite, King Salman couldn't blow his nose.
Quote from: Syt on May 18, 2015, 04:31:04 AM
http://www.ippnw.org/nuclear-famine.html
Looks like China would be fucked.
Oh my god everyone, proliferation is spreading!!11 :o
Quote from: Syt on May 18, 2015, 04:31:04 AM
http://www.ippnw.org/nuclear-famine.html
We'd get through it. Tim made a surprisingly good point.
Quote from: derspiess on May 18, 2015, 08:01:54 AM
Quote from: Syt on May 18, 2015, 04:31:04 AM
http://www.ippnw.org/nuclear-famine.html
We'd get through it. Tim made a surprisingly good point.
Not really; he would have been better off stating that it was unlikely that an Arab-Iranian exchange would involve anywhere near a 100 warheads for the foreseeable future.
His actual point about the warheads is a case of apples and oranges when you think about it for a while. For example, of the over 2000 nuclear tests that have been carried out since 1945 over 1500 of them have been underground, whereas the weapons used in any nuclear exchange would all be airburst weapons. The 500+ atmospheric tests took place over a period of 35 years with a global geographical dispersion; that's a lot different from the article's specification of a 100 weapons going off in, at most, a few days at in a fairly small geographical location. A manmade 535/6 event type scenario, in other words.
The bigger worry here is that ISI and Saudi intelligence tend to lend a hand and look sideways when certain types of, ehm, committed religious people have a look around their inventory.
One of the assumptions about nuclear winter scenarios is that the weapons go off over populated areas. I am skeptical that the resulting firestorms would put smoke high enough into the atmosphere to cause long term change.
Quote from: Razgovory on May 18, 2015, 06:48:01 PM
One of the assumptions about nuclear winter scenarios is that the weapons go off over populated areas. I am skeptical that the resulting firestorms would put smoke high enough into the atmosphere to cause long term change.
One way to find out.
Quote from: Martinus on May 18, 2015, 03:33:43 AM
Oh no, this could result in the Middle Eastern countries annihilating each other completely in a mutually assured destruction nuclear exchange. :hmm:
Leaving the entire region to... :Joos ?
Quote from: alfred russel on May 18, 2015, 07:20:51 PM
Quote from: Martinus on May 18, 2015, 03:33:43 AM
Oh no, this could result in the Middle Eastern countries annihilating each other completely in a mutually assured destruction nuclear exchange. :hmm:
Leaving the entire region to... :Joos ?
He's a Euro, he's counting on one of those countries being wiped out being Israel.
Which, let's be honest here, it would be.
That's why they get excited.
Quote from: grumbler on May 18, 2015, 06:23:25 AM
If brains were dynamite, King Salman couldn't blow his nose.
So . . . his brains may still be quite sizable then?