Hang onn Guppies
we r gona have a new BUM soon
with a range of 2175 miles
it seems to me that this time the target is not just India
daal main kuch kaala hay
Get the news here
http://www.sltrib.com/2004/Jun/06212004/commenta/commenta.asp
damn it
no reply
aren't u guys proud [or worried ] abt the BUM
I m proud of it 
May Allah bless us all 
great news!
the article talks about a pre-emptive strike from israel. not totally inconceivable, but if anyone thinks that israel hadn't already thought about then think again. pakistan's neclear program survived this long not because there were no enemies who wanted to destroy it but because we are able to defend our nuclear installations. india/israel would take it out in a moment if they could.
another hypothesis in the article is that
===
Did the generals who asked for it know that it would put Israel within range of Pakistan's nuclear weapons? I don't know, but most generals can read maps.
===
this is a very naive view. these missiles requires years of research and immense resources. i bet those who are in the decion-making positions knew exactly what they were doing. its not like one fine day the general saheb is reading jang newspaper and then looks up the map and says "kewl, now we have israel in our range".
seems to me pakistan has long term strategic objectives in going for these long-range missiles. interesting.
Pakistan and israel both know about what they are doing.
Pakistan always had this kind of reach but only they dont say or test these long range not to spark unwanted attention from Israel like counteries.
it may worry Israel but a pre emptive strike is somthing which they may have in mind but not on the table yet.
First - The Article is a propaganda, considering where it's published. (Salt Lake City)
Second - Israel was supplying weapons to Pakistan in the 1980s secretly while Pakistan was confronting the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.
Third - Pakistan always condems Israeli actions in Palestine but at the same time is desparate to recognise Israel. However, Israel has never ever publically said it views Pakistan as an enemy or a threat but instead I heard the Israeli Foreign Minister on Prime TV say that Pakistanis are welcomed to travel to Israel.
Lastly - The US has 1,000 troops in Pakistan. had it viewed Pakistan as a threat to it's baby Israel, it would have dismanteld Pakistan's nuclear infra-structure by now.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Shehenshah: *
damn it
no reply
aren't u guys proud [or worried ] abt the BUM
[/QUOTE]
I don't think Pakistan has the tehnology to fire the Ghauri-III yet.
A Ballistic Missile with that sort of range requires highly complicated technology.
I'm worried. It goes beyond the "minimal credible deterrernce" theory Musharraff is using to keep the West off his back and justify Pakistan's nuclear program. How would he justify the new missile as necessary for "minimal credible deterrence"?
Wawa, again another new Ghouri with new capabilities. Mash'Allah.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by haroon2004: *
How would he justify the new missile as necessary for "minimal credible deterrence"?
[/QUOTE]
because we don't have a credible deterrence capability yet. The former Indian defence minister, George Fernandes, made that clear 2 years ago whe, during the last nuclear stand-off, he made the proposal that India would be able to tolerate the few dozen million fatalities that would result from the unleashing of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal and continue, but Pakistan would not be able to do so.
We'll have minimal credible deterrence capability when no Indian government minister will ever be able to seriously propose that India would be able to survive a Pakistani nuclear strike.
If government ministers believe that a Pakistani nuclear strike can be shrugged off, then our capability is not sufficient for deterrence.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by mAd_ScIeNtIsT: *
because we don't have a credible deterrence capability yet. The former Indian defence minister, George Fernandes, made that clear 2 years ago whe, during the last nuclear stand-off, he made the proposal that India would be able to tolerate the few dozen million fatalities that would result from the unleashing of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal and continue, but Pakistan would not be able to do so.
We'll have minimal credible deterrence capability when no Indian government minister will ever be able to seriously propose that India would be able to survive a Pakistani nuclear strike.
If government ministers believe that a Pakistani nuclear strike can be shrugged off, then our capability is not sufficient for deterrence.
[/QUOTE]
I thought the current missiles in the arsenal can already reach all of India. This one goes beyond that distance. Building more of the earlier missiles to cover India is one thing for "minimal credible deterrence" against India. This appears to go beyond that. What happen's when the striking range is America's baby? One can already see what happened to Iraq and what is going to happen to Iran (both accused of building WMD's capable of striking Israel).
No, population centres on the southern and eastern end of India's mainland and some of the islands that belong to India are currently out of reach.
And out existing missiles are already a potential threat to Israel, because if sited just a short distance of the Iranian border they can hit every Israeli population centre.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by mAd_ScIeNtIsT: *
because we don't have a credible deterrence capability yet. The former Indian defence minister, George Fernandes, made that clear 2 years ago whe, during the last nuclear stand-off, he made the proposal that India would be able to tolerate the few dozen million fatalities that would result from the unleashing of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal and continue, but Pakistan would not be able to do so.
We'll have minimal credible deterrence capability when no Indian government minister will ever be able to seriously propose that India would be able to survive a Pakistani nuclear strike.
If government ministers believe that a Pakistani nuclear strike can be shrugged off, then our capability is not sufficient for deterrence.
[/QUOTE]
*"India would be able to tolerate the few dozen million fatalities" *
Georgy is a clown to say this. Its not a numbers game. Nor it is a chess game. Just two bomb blasts in Bombay let the steam out of the Shiv Sena goons who were on a wild rampage killing Muslims. In any case Georgy (who was being more loyal than the king) is out of contention.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by tshombe39: *
*"India would be able to tolerate the few dozen million fatalities" *
Georgy is a clown to say this.
[/QUOTE]
Of course, and he accused of being so in the Indian media.
Nonetheless, it is utterly terrifying that a man who would hold such views to actually be the Defence Minister of a country....