Pakistan heading towards chaos: Imran

[raych123]

NEW YORK ? Pakistan could fall into chaos in the next three months as the government has not come up with a plan to deal with the gigantic problems resulting from deadly floods in Pakistan, Tehreek-e-Insaf chief Imran Khan said Sunday.
Appearing on American television, Khan painted a grim picture of the situation created by the worst-ever floods in Pakistan where more than 20 million people are without their homes and suffering because of lack of food.
?Most of these people are subsistence farmers who live on the produce of their lands,? he told Fareed Zakaria on CNN?s GPS programme. Having lost everything? all their possessions and income ? such a large mass of the population could pose serious problems, the PTI leader said.
Imran said the mood in the country was ?depressing? as the government had failed to take care of the affected people. ?There is no food even in the relief camps run by the government.?
?Pakistan is in dire straits,? he said, referring to the destruction of cash crops and infrastructure that has resulted in huge losses to the country and needed all help it could get. The international community, he said, has not comprehended the gravity of the situation.
Imran strong criticised President Asif Ali Zardari?s 10-day visit to France and England while the country was being battered by furious floods. He said Zardari?s supporters were justifying the trip by saying that he was trying to raise funds for the government?s relief efforts. Yet, the money raised was probably the lowest for any other natural disasters.
Replying to a question, Imran downplayed the alarm being raised in the West about the relief work being done by some Islamic charities. At this stage, any help that the flood-hit people could get was welcome. ?It is a matter of their survival.?
The Islamic organisations have been in existence for a long time, but their humanitarian services, have never translated into votes at the elections. The people of Pakistan were not so naive as to adopt their ideologies in return for their relief effort.
Raychannel

 

[omej]

Pakistan has been going downhill in every way for a long time now. The government is politically weak and is only able to keep terrorists at bay by appeasing them. Socially, it ranks horrible in terms of rights and freedoms and the country is rampant with corruption.

The only reason we throw so much money at them is to keep the nuclear arms from going missing. Too bad so much of the money is wasted.

 

[AK_ID]

Omey, my guess is that we'll contribute a bundle of dollars, and it won't make any improvement. Already, rumors abound that aid supplies are being siphoned off by tribal nutcases and anti-Western factions. We can't buy friends, and it appears it's not possible to purchase free passes from the Stone Age to the 21st century, either.

 

[obtuseobserver]

Pakistan has been going downhill in every way for a long time now. The government is politically weak and is only able to keep terrorists at bay by appeasing them. Socially, it ranks horrible in terms of rights and freedoms and the country is rampant with corruption.

The only reason we throw so much money at them is to keep the nuclear arms from going missing. Too bad so much of the money is wasted.

all true but suggests bygone days of prosperity and tranquility

when was that? (not saying it never happened - saying 'did it happen?'"

I do hope to God we have catalogued all their nukes and are tracking them daily

To date, afaik, only one state has ever totally deescalted and given up all of their nukes (SA) though Libya did give up a bunch of junk they couldn't make work so we wouldn't mess with them... though this Lockerbie thing is deeply troubling

 

[myp]

all true but suggests bygone days of prosperity and tranquility

when was that? (not saying it never happened - saying 'did it happen?'"

Pakistan isn't that old of a country, but when it was part of India, they certainly had some very prosperous times (I am talking pre-British rule.)

I do hope to God we have catalogued all their nukes and are tracking them daily

To date, afaik, only one state has ever totally deescalted and given up all of their nukes (SA) though Libya did give up a bunch of junk they couldn't make work so we wouldn't mess with them... though this Lockerbie thing is deeply troubling

Much easier than tracking all the nukes, which eventually becomes something closer to a wild goose chase, is to invest in a missile defense system where we would be able to detect and destroy any missile headed here before it could do any damage on the ground- certainly one of Reagan's better ideas. The technology already exists- Israel even has a system implemented if I remember correctly- it is just a matter of figuring out how to set it up for maximum efficiency in the states and harder, to get the political support (and $) for it.

 

[obtuseobserver]

Pakistan isn't that old of a country, but when it was part of India, they certainly had some very prosperous times (I am talking pre-British rule.)

Lol. True. But the region has existed for a very very long time. Pakistan split off from Inda and then East Pakistan split from Pakistan and became Bangladesh.

My question better said would be... has that region had periods of tranquility and abundance.

"Why yes, yes they did" doesn't really help me. When did they have this peaceful abundant time. That area has been at the crossroads of trade, war etc etc for millenia


Much easier than tracking all the nukes, which eventually becomes something closer to a wild goose chase, is to invest in a missile defense system where we would be able to detect and destroy any missile headed here before it could do any damage on the ground- certainly one of Reagan's better ideas. The technology already exists- Israel even has a system implemented if I remember correctly- it is just a matter of figuring out how to set it up for maximum efficiency in the states and harder, to get the political support (and $) for it.[/QUOTE]

 

[omej]

Much easier than tracking all the nukes, which eventually becomes something closer to a wild goose chase, is to invest in a missile defense system where we would be able to detect and destroy any missile headed here before it could do any damage on the ground- certainly one of Reagan's better ideas. The technology already exists- Israel even has a system implemented if I remember correctly- it is just a matter of figuring out how to set it up for maximum efficiency in the states and harder, to get the political support (and $) for it.

A missile defense is great for defense for more conventional countries with solid control of their missiles but Pakistan has a unique situation.

The threat from Pakistan is not missiles - it's that terrorists will be able to steal the actual warheads and construct a 'dirty bomb' that could be placed in any large van or truck. Given how poorly we guard our borders and ports, it would be extremely difficult to detect them until it was too late.

 

[AK_ID]

Maybe we'll all get lucky and the dirty bombs will end up blowing in Islamabad.

 

[obtuseobserver]

A missile defense is great for defense for more conventional countries with solid control of their missiles but Pakistan has a unique situation.

The threat from Pakistan is not missiles - it's that terrorists will be able to steal the actual warheads and construct a 'dirty bomb' that could be placed in any large van or truck. Given how poorly we guard our borders and ports, it would be extremely difficult to detect them until it was too late.

as I understand it we do have decent radiation detection devices at many (all?) ports of entry by boat and border crossings by cars and trucks.

That's not to say they couldn't avoid this by going off road but warheads are not easily moved and even less easily over rugged terrain.

 

[danstevens80]

Much easier?

Pakistan isn't that old of a country, but when it was part of India, they certainly had some very prosperous times (I am talking pre-British rule.)


Much easier than tracking all the nukes, which eventually becomes something closer to a wild goose chase, is to invest in a missile defense system where we would be able to detect and destroy any missile headed here before it could do any damage on the ground- certainly one of Reagan's better ideas. The technology already exists- Israel even has a system implemented if I remember correctly- it is just a matter of figuring out how to set it up for maximum efficiency in the states and harder, to get the political support (and $) for it.

Who said that a nuclear explosion above ground is much easier to handle? I mean, we should be relatively safe, but the damage to the atmosphere (given that the interception is achieved over water and not another unsuspecting country) will be devastating.

 

[obtuseobserver]

Who said that a nuclear explosion above ground is much easier to handle? I mean, we should be relatively safe, but the damage to the atmosphere (given that the interception is achieved over water and not another unsuspecting country) will be devastating.

An intercepted nuclear missile would be a pile of hot metal and a bunch of radio-active debris. Interception would not trigger the detonating mechanisms on the missile (presuming single warhead). With MIRVs the same is probably true but now the number of targets has multiplied. So, to maximize effectiveness one wants to knock them down ASAHFP. Once one lauch is confirmed all potential launch targets should be immediately destroyed to prevent any additional launches.


edit: with regard to detonation mechanisms... I should qualify that. From my understanding nuclear warheads activate their detonation procedure after leaving the missile w/MIRVs and at some point well after lauch (and beyond the lunacher's territory) has occurred.