Saudi Nuclear Weapons

[Turkeyslapper]

Saudi nuclear weapons from Pakistan..what could possibly go wrong??

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24823846

[Trim Stab]

Well if I lived in Saudi and had a belligerent near neighbour that is nuclear, chemical and bio-armed, ignores international law, refuses to accept any peace negotiations except on their own unreasonable terms, and has an established track record of pre-emptive attacks, I would also want nuclear weapons.

[jolihokistix]

Unfortunately for the world, such a transfer makes sense from so many points of view, not least because both are majority Sunni countries and upstart Iran is Shiite and increasingly threatening to destabilize the status quo in the region.

[flyhardmo]

Trim Stab Well if I lived in Saudi and had a belligerent near neighbour that is nuclear, chemical and bio-armed, ignores international law, refuses to accept any peace negotiations except on their own unreasonable terms, and has an established track record of pre-emptive attacks, I would also want nuclear weapons.

Yep Trim, sounds like Israel to me



For those of you who think that Saudi obtaining WMD's is reasonable just remember who sponsors Al Qaeda, spends billions on promoting Wahhabism which has produced extremists the world over.

[SASless]

So.....in time we shall have Sunni's and Shia Tribes with Nukes......how comforting knowing the glee they take in snuffing one another already using conventional arms, knives, car bombs, and poison gas and nerve gas!

Whatever could go wrong with this Situation?

[BillHicksRules]

Trim,

But the US is Saudi Arabia's pal?

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Well, I put a thread on this yesterday but it got 'modded'.
What I would like to ask the team is, is this it?
Is there just an SSM site (which a single air raid might significantly disable), or does the House of Saud have access to air-droppable bombs and nuke tips for cruise missiles on subs?
They are in the market for 5 German subs, which is where the Israelis got their conventional-only-absolutely-not-nuke-capable-no-no-no-....OK-yes subs.

[skydiver69]

I wonder what implications this will have for the talks with Iran to stop their nuclear programme? Iran and Saudi Arabia don't exactly get on and both vie for leadership of the Islamic world so I can see this going down like a lead balloon in Tehran. The timing is also interesting given that the news has become public at the same time as new negotiations with Iran. I wonder if the Saudis want the sanctions to remain in place on Iran as a way of keeping their oil away from most of the global market whilst also giving them an opportunity to sell more refined fuel back to them to make up for the shortfall in local production. Obtaining nuclear weapons would make the Iranians even more twitchy and therefore more likely to keep up with their nuclear programme leading to more sanctions.

[The Old Fat One]

Saudi is a signatory of the NPT and observes the NPT. (I'm assuming anyone with an interest in the subject knows what the NPT is).

One of the "sources" quoted is the former head of intelligence if Israel...one of a tiny handful of states that reject the NPT. Credibility? Hypocrisy?

Anybody who has studied the nuclear proliferation in past forty something years will know full well that there are many states that have what might be called "an immediate dormant nuclear capability". That is to say they can go nuclear at the flick of a switch, if they so desire. Japan is another good example of just such a country.

This is (and has been for a very long time) the price we pay for keeping nukes anywhere on the planet. It was the original long term primary goal of the NPT to seek the eventual removal of all nuclear weapons everywhere. The fact that we are one of the Big Five (US, Russia, France, China & UK) and that not one of the Big Five has ever unilaterally disarmed makes us part of the problem, not part of the solution.

As more and more countries enter the nuclear club outside the NPT (currently four: Israel, India, Pakistan & North Korea) the spread of uncontrolled nuclear weapons increases. If Iran does develop a nuclear weapons capability that will be ten total...which interestingly was seen as the tipping point for mass proliferation back in the seventies.

All of this is the reason I agree with many of the world's leading academics in the field of nuclear proliferation...it is only a matter of time before somebody drops the big one again.

I'm not prescribing here...merely stating facts.

[SASless]

that not one of the Big Five has ever unilaterally disarmed makes us part of the problem, not part of the solution.

If you believe one of the Five should ever disarm unilaterally .....you are barking mad!

That is never going to happen.....not even Welfare Man is that naive or stupid and he surely borders on the Barking Mindset.

Sadly, I see a Nuclear War of some sort in the future.....as when our Muslim friends all get geared up there shall be Hell to pay.....should their Leaders themselves glob onto the notion of their own martyrdom.....and not just their gullible followers.

[AtomKraft]

The UK may be the first to disarm.
Indeed, if Sctland wins its independence, the Trident boats will soon be homeless.
It's clear the English have nowhere they will be able to base them. Although perhaps they will tie them up outside Westminster?

I guess though, they might change to cruise missiles to remain in the club.

Could someone remind me who we are deterring again? Because AQ it certainly isn't!

[500N]

" Indeed, if Sctland wins its independence, the Trident boats
will soon be homeless."

You reckon GB won't be able to come to some sort of agreement with Scotland ?

I sometimes wonder if Scotland isn't cutting off it's nose to spite it's face.

[Eclectic]

Shia and Sunni hate each other far more than they hate anything else.

We in the West have chosen to be friends with the Sunnis, which makes us enemies of the Shias. There is no logic to our preference other than the Saudis having the most oil. In fact the Sunnis (our friends) tend to be nastier than the Shias (our enemies).

Peace (or what passes for peace amongst these nations) was maintained by the threat of an American big stick. This threat has gone:
1) Because Obama is a weak windbag, unfit for purpose.
2) The American's discovered shale oil/gas and no longer need the Arabs.
3) Several moslem countries followed the bucket of sunshine instruction manual and think this will frighten America.
4) The Arab spring proved that America just isn't interested any more.
5) Putin out smarts Obama at every turn.

We have several pending nuclear wars in the world. N & S Korea, India and Pakistan, Shia Vs Sunni. Of these the last is by far the most likely because it has the highest level of hate and because it is the most impossible to resolve.

So eventually expect glass car parks in the Middle East (especially with Israel acting as agent provocateur).
As for the UK, we should build the whole new fleet of boomers and stuff them with as many warheads as will fit. One thing the Arabs definitely understand is power. We want them to leave us alone.

[West Coast]

According to press reports, the MOD is considering basing the boats in the US or France till a long term solution is decided.

Those uppity Scott's, I swear...

Eclectic

I'm sure Israel wants its say and influences outcomes to the degree possible but it's not in their best interests to have neighbors lobbing nukes, even if it's not at them.

[SASless]

Must be the Scots want too much in the way of Moorage.....and the English are too Mean to cough up the money! After all.....a Yorkshireman is nothing but a Scot with all the generosity squeezed out of him!

[AtomKraft]

west coast
Sheesh, how ironic would it be if our UK deterrent had to based abroad because there is no where in England where the English will accept it being based?


500N
If Salmond was to go back on that promise- I suppose it would be a bit like the Lib Dems welching on their 'no tuition fees' pledge- but multiplied by ten. His credibility would go to zero.

[Always a Sapper]

Originally Posted by AtomKraft

If Salmond was to go back on that promise- I suppose it would be a bit like the Lib Dems welcoming on their 'no tuition fees' pledge- but multiplied but ten. His credibility would go to zero.

In which case, with the rise to zero Salmonds credibility would actually improve...

[AtomKraft]

Always a Sapper.

You funny!

[con-pilot]

But the US is Saudi Arabia's pal?

Not so much anymore and they know it. These types of things happen when it is suddenly figure out, that despite the nay sayers (Democrats), you have a hell of a lot more oil and natural gas than thought.

The only problem with natural gas is, if you are a lease holder as me, there is too much of the stuff now. We're not even receiving a month what we used to pay in taxes ten years ago.

[The Old Fat One]

If you believe one of the Five would ever disarm unilaterally .....you are barking mad!

First, I fixed your post.

Second, I don't...which I was why I footnoted thus...

I'm not prescribing here...merely stating facts.

Sadly, I see a Nuclear War of some sort in the future

...and I agree with this, but not with the sentiment, that it will all be down to the muslims. As we now know we got very close to a nuclear exchange when Uncle Sam and the Russian Bear were going toe to toe in the sixties, without including scores of "accidental" misfire close shaves. Add to the mix the Israeli's, who can be pretty quick on the trigger these days. The Indian and Pakistan's are none too keen, and only ten minutes flying time apart and of course, it's not to fanciful to suggest that the Taliban might get control of the Pakistani inventory one day.

So yeah...it's only a matter of time, isn't it.