Re: Attack on Holy places!
Well, there are Ahadith that mention that attack on Makkah and Madina will happen, ma be not now, 100 year or a 1000 years from now but it will.
Re: Attack on Holy places!
Well, there are Ahadith that mention that attack on Makkah and Madina will happen, ma be not now, 100 year or a 1000 years from now but it will.
:O if its possible. Can you give a reference.
Re: Attack on Holy places!
so as a result of attack on iraq muslims shoud bomb pop's residence is rom??
Except that most Americans are not Catholic and that majority of deaths of Iraqi Muslims is at the hands of other Muslims right now.
Re: Attack on Holy places!
Well, there are Ahadith that mention that attack on Makkah and Madina will happen, ma be not now, 100 year or a 1000 years from now but it will.
That's already happened in 61-70 AH.
Re: Attack on Holy places!
Before derring USA to try and attack, you will be wise to understand a few facts. I'll hasten to caution that given the credible source I've read these from and putting 2 and 2 together, I believe it but you should read and come to your own conclusions.The 1st step in any direct US Pak conflict will be the disablement of Pak's nuclear capabiity. This is to prevent a situation where Pak can hold Israel and India hostage. A full list (with very minor gaps) of all nuclear assets and locations including the surprisingly negligible mobile locations have been provided to US. This was a condition underwhich the 2001 push by US on India for retraint was conducted. Between economic threat by US on India (read last Business week, article by Jack Welch) and assurance of nuke info custodial, is what made India back track on the 'decisive now' cry.The Indo US nuke deal combined wikth open statement that Pakistan is different and cannot have a deal, is basically the final verdict that US is fully prepared to take their gloves of.
Source plz?
I do not doubt that the US knows the layout of Pak's nuclear infrasyructure, but I do doubt whether Pak provided that info. Plus to find a warhead, the size of a soccer ball, in a land as big as Pakistan...good luck.
Re: Attack on Holy places!
Ib kay aaa saalay! Ib kay maar saalay! Mamoon Arab ko bataoon gaa! Ib kay aaa saalay!
[Trans: Hit me o baboo one more time! Oh! I need it so baaaadly!]
On a serious note:
-
Attacking Makkah (god forbid) by Americans is a distant thingy. Our own Al-Qaida monsters have already done that in 1979.
-
Attacking FATA border by America is a distant thingy. Arabs terrorists and their Pashtoon lackeys are already doing that via their be-ghairat acts of suicidal bombings.
So anyone asking “them” to try attacking is a simple minded statement at best.
Re: Attack on Holy places!
legbreak & abdullah - as I clearly stated in my post, you draw your own conclusions based on how much credibility you attach to what you read. Given the nature of the subject do you seriously think there will be web published document summarizing this for your edification? even if there is, do you think i will publish it to you? That is why I said "put 2 and 2 together" after "assigning credibility to what you read".
even that I wrote only because in this thread a couple of people wrote "bring it on" type of dare to USA. they should know better
Re: Attack on Holy places!
^^ Well now you mention it, another guy I know [pretty good with military stuff especially airforce] said the same thing that pakistan probably handed over its nukes to america for safekeeping. I doubt that pakistan would let india know IF such a deal happened as the whole deterrance idea would be a joke, rigt?
Re: Attack on Holy places!
Except that most Americans are not Catholic and that majority of deaths of Iraqi Muslims is at the hands of other Muslims right now.
**if i was king of a country
country 200 time stronger then USA
country 200 time richer then USA
country 200 time more technically advance then usa
If in my country universities and research institutes had 100s of years of study of American/christian/European history
I could create a civil war in usa with out a problem, hance making american kill each other american.**
Re: Attack on Holy places!
**if i was king of a country
country 200 time stronger then USA country 200 time richer then USA country 200 time more technically advance then usa If in my country universities and research institutes had 100s of years of study of American/christian/European history
I could create a civil war in usa with out a problem, hance making american kill each other american.**
Would also be able to protect the lives of your fantasy country's soldiers lives? And who is trying to create a civil war in Pakistan by suicide bombings and attacks?
Re: Attack on Holy places!
In addition to the Jack Welch statement in Business Week I referred to, as stated in the bolded text above, I am now providing a surprisingly candid and accurate account that was published in CNN - a full week after I wrote it!
** Sources: U.S. assessing Pakistan nukes if Musharraf falls**
- Story Highlights
- U.S. concerned about who would control Pakistan’s nukes after power shift
- Pakistan’s president ponders state of emergency as his opposition grows
- Pakistan troops moving to tribal areas of Afghan border, officials say
- Musharraf’s control over military remains limited to certain top commanders
From Barbara Starr
CNN Washington Bureau
http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/2.0/global/story_tools/text_size.gif
http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/2.0/global/story_tools/txt_minus.gif
http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/2.0/global/story_tools/txt_minus_dn_.gif
http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/2.0/global/story_tools/txt_plus.gif
http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/2.0/global/story_tools/txt_plus_dn.gif
WASHINGTON (CNN) – U.S. military intelligence officials are urgently assessing how secure Pakistan’s nuclear weapons would be in the event President Gen. Pervez Musharraf were replaced as the nation’s leader, CNN has learned.
Key questions in the assessment include who would control Pakistan’s nuclear weapons after a shift in power. The United States is pressuring Musharraf, who took control in a 1999 coup, not to declare a state of emergency as he faces growing political opposition.
Three U.S. sources have independently confirmed details of the intelligence review to CNN but would not allow their names to be used because of the sensitivity of the matter.
The sources include military officers and intelligence community analysts.
The assessment is part of a broader review of the military and security situation in Pakistan.
Officials say that Pakistan and its nuclear weapons are always a high intelligence priority for the United States.
The current review is a result of recent developments in that country, including the prospect that Musharraf could still declare a national emergency that would give him sweeping powers.
Although the Pakistani government ruled out the declaration Thursday, the three sources told CNN that the United States thinks Musharraf may still impose those measures.
Musharraf was elected to president in a 2002 vote that was widely viewed as rigged. His five-year presidential term expires in November and he is seeking to retain his position as president and army chief. Pakistani elections are scheduled sometime around the turn of the year.
U.S. analysts are watching current Pakistani troop movements closely to see whether Musharraf is making any moves that could indicate he is about to impose emergency measures. It appears that in recent weeks a large number of troops left the Kashmir region to go to the tribal regions along the Afghan border, officials say.
Afghan officials have accused Pakistan of allowing Taliban and al Qaeda fighters to regroup and carve out a new safe haven along Pakistan’s largely lawless northwestern frontier.
**The United States has full knowledge about the location of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, **according to the U.S. assessment.
But the key questions, officials say, are what would happen and who would control the weapons in the hours after any change in government in case Musharraf were killed or overthrown.
Musharraf controls the loyalty of the commanders and senior officials in charge of the nuclear program, but those loyalties could shift at any point, officials say.
The United States is not certain who might start controlling nuclear launch codes and weapons if that shift in power were to happen.
There is also a growing understanding according to the U.S. analysis that Musharraf’s control over the military remains limited to certain top commanders and units, raising worries about whether he can maintain control over the long term.
The U.S. officials also say one of the key problems for the U.S. military is what restrictions on U.S.-Pakistani military cooperation could be imposed if Musharraf were to impose heavy security restrictions in his country.
Re: Attack on Holy places!
He said that if there is a nuclear attack on US by muslims, US should nuke muslim holy places. I think that's fairly logical from an American perspective.
You cant punish Islam for the wrong of some psychotic Muslims... Thats not logic, thats genocidal!
Re: Attack on Holy places!
Ib kay aaa saalay! Ib kay maar saalay! Mamoon Arab ko bataoon gaa! Ib kay aaa saalay!
[Trans: Hit me o baboo one more time! Oh! I need it so baaaadly!]
On a serious note:
Attacking Makkah (god forbid) by Americans is a distant thingy. Our own Al-Qaida monsters have already done that in 1979.
Attacking FATA border by America is a distant thingy. Arabs terrorists and their Pashtoon lackeys are already doing that via their be-ghairat acts of suicidal bombings.
So anyone asking "them" to try attacking is a simple minded statement at best.
An attack on holy site as important as those, is not just stupid, it literaly is suicidal for the West.. People underestimate the inherant strength of 1.5 BILLION Muslims..
If America thinks it has a hard time dealing with Muslims now, imagine when even the moderate and liberals start joining the extremists under their Jihadist flag.