Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : India Coffee House -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: hmbsandman who wrote (8487)	10/18/1999 1:18:00 PM
From: sea_biscuit	Respond to of 12475

Actually the burden of proof is upto you: I'm not the one making this absurd claim of unopened missile crates, you are. You know when I buy a new car, I don't just leave it sitting in my garage, I drive it around. My source is the Center for Non-proliferation Studies, USA. And btw, most sensible people would think that assembling and launching a missile is somewhat more complex than starting a car and driving it around!<g> I do know that the Pak military mucky-mucks spent an awful amount of time in Beijing before they were allowed to explode their devices (this is restraint?) Yes, of course. Pakistan was not able to explode a nuclear device for 24 years after India did it first. In the meantime, there were all kinds of statements that Pakistan would catch up with India on the nuclear front (including the famous statement by Z. A. Bhutto). In spite of all that, the fact of the matter is Pakistan was unable to explode their nuclear devices until India did last year. Which they did, almost within 24 hours of India's tests. Sure, maybe Gertz is part of that "vast right-wing conspiracy", but he still has better credentials than you. He spent a considerable amount of time covering national security for the Washington Times. Whereas you are just another anonymous geek on a chat room. The point is not one of Gertz vs. me, or somebody else with the proper credentials vs. a supposedly-not-anonymous geek like you. It is about people like Gertz vs. the people with the proper credentials, and who are as well-informed as, if not better informed than, him.

To: hmbsandman who wrote (8487)	10/18/1999 4:06:00 PM
From: Shivram Hala	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12475

Oh! my god, you called it and anonymous geek. Now be prepared. It will run to its momma and complain about you. From fas.org Early 1980's--Multiple reports that Pakistan obtained a pre-tested, atomic bomb design from China. Early 1980's--Multiple reports that Pakistan obtained bomb-grade enriched uranium from China. 1987 -- China concluded a deal with Pakistan to sell M-11 missiles and launchers. 1989--ACDA unclassified report cites Chinese assistance to missile program in Pakistan. 1991--Wall Street Journal says Pakistan is buying nuclear-capable M-11 missile from China. Late 1992 -- The US Government determines that China had transferred items controlled under the international Missile Technology Control Regime to Pakistan. 25 August 1993 -- The United States imposed "Category Two" sanctions against certain Chinese and Pakistani entities that were involved in an M-11 missile-related transfer, which is prohibited under US law. Late 1996 -- Pakistan's main nuclear weapons laboratory, the A.Q. Khan Laboratory in Kahuta, purchased 5,000 ring magnets from China. The ring magnets would allow Pakistan to effectively double its capacity to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons production.

To: hmbsandman who wrote (8487)	10/18/1999 4:43:00 PM
From: Shivram Hala	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12475

The pro-republican wash.times has been right about missile proliferation which the administration has admitted to as being right. "since a government agency leaked the North Korea-Egypt missile equipment deal to the press. THE WASHINGTON TIMES reported this on 21 June. That day, Nicholas Burns, a spokesman for the U.S. State Department, said "this is the second leak of information following one last week" and sternly denounced the undisclosed leakers as "narrow-minded and gutless." He also deplored the leakers, saying: "They have leaked the information to THE WASHINGTON TIMES, thus knifing some State Department officials and causing inter-agency bickering." When questioned which agency had leaked the information, he backtracked, saying: "There is a suspicion, but I cannot tell." " And they were right about the M11 transfers tooas reported by Gertz. 209.207.236.112 23 Jun 96 p 7 Seoul KYONGHYANG SINMUN by Pak In-kyu The Clinton administration, which has faced difficulties conducting its foreign policy due to the deep cuts made to its diplomacy budgets by the Republican-controlled Congress, is now in trouble due to internal bickering: It faces a dilemma ever since a government agency leaked the North Korea-Egypt missile equipment deal to the press. THE WASHINGTON TIMES reported this on 21 June. That day, Nicholas Burns, a spokesman for the U.S. State Department, said "this is the second leak of information following one last week" and sternly denounced the undisclosed leakers as "narrow-minded and gutless." He also deplored the leakers, saying: "They have leaked the information to THE WASHINGTON TIMES, thus knifing some State Department officials and causing inter-agency bickering." When questioned which agency had leaked the information, he backtracked, saying: "There is a suspicion, but I cannot tell." THE WASHINGTON TIMES reported the PRC's sales of M11 missiles to Pakistan last week, which has placed the Clinton administration in an embarrassing situation. Prior to that, the Clinton administration decided not to impose sanctions on the PRC despite Beijing's sales of nuclear equipment to Pakistan. The administration made the decision in the belief that it need not incur the PRC's displeasure at a time when it acutely needed Beijing's diplomatic cooperation over the North Korean issue and other matters. North Korea and Egypt occupy an important position as far as U.S. diplomacy is concerned. Egypt is a major partner of the United States when it comes to U.S. policy in the Middle East. The United States gives Egypt $2.1 billion in assistance annually, the biggest recipient after Israel. Moreover, the United States is not in a position to distance itself from Egypt because all the accomplishments it has achieved in the Middle East peace process are at stake since [former Israeli Prime Minister] Shim'on Peres has lost power. North Korea's case is more tricky. The Clinton administration has boasted about the North Korean nuclear freeze, a result of the Geneva agreement, as its greatest diplomatic accomplishment, and has maintained a policy of "embracing North Korea." However, as North Korea's exports of missile equipment have been disclosed, the position of the Clinton administration has become less convincing. Moreover, North Korea's credibility will again decrease because the information on the North Korea-Egypt missile deal was leaked while North Korea-U.S. missile negotiations were under way. Nevertheless, the Clinton administration will seek to solve the problem concerning North Korea not through sanctions, but through persuasion. However, this strategy will not go down well with the Republican Party.