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.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (22089)	12/30/2003 10:37:04 PM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 793689

"It's what we don't know that worries us," said a senior administration official, "including the critical question of how much fissile material Pakistan now holds — and where it holds it."... ...One Pentagon official said any raid by the American military to secure Pakistan's nuclear arsenal during a period of chaos would be "an extremely difficult and highly risky venture." Other administration officials termed it simply impossible. That seems to answer a question we've tossed about here now and then. Not a reassuring answer, but hardly a surprising one.

To: LindyBill who wrote (22089)	12/31/2003 12:29:21 AM
From: Sam	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793689

Officials said they were relatively confident that even if General Musharraf lost power or was killed, Pakistan has established some fairly reliable nuclear safeguards. Nuclear warheads, triggering devices and the delivery systems for the weapons are all stored separately; thus, it would be difficult to steal a complete weapon, according to administration officials and academic analysts. I don't understand why this is reassuring. If there is a coup and Al Qaeda or any rabidly anti-American types get control of the Pakistani government, why would they not then have access to the weapons even if they are "stored separately"? Or at least the enriched uranium?