What about economic sanctions? I thought that’s how the powerful nations tend to exert pressure nowadays
I have several times begun a reply to your various assertion/harebrained ideas, but decided that it’s not really worth the headache since well you are obviously getting your information from comic books and are thus an expert, but I will tell you this, there have been since the late 1980s many agreements with India on nuclear issues including hotlines between political leaders, military commanders, an exchange of lists of nuclear sites, notifications of tests, as well as agreement that neither country will ordinarily mate warheads with launchers or keep nuclear capable aircraft on near border airbases.
Pakistan’s nuclear weapons development started in the early 1970s, with successful test in 1998. Nixon-Carter-Reagan-Clinton. That’s 50/50 Republican/Democrat, with the first successful test taking place smack in the middle of Clinton’s second term.
But not everything that happens in the world is caused by American actions.
Thank Smiling Buddha, Indira Gandhi and Brezahev for that.
I know Pakistan is supposed to have somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 warheads, but how many of those are actually weaponized such that they could be delivered to a regional target within a week or so?
And Pakistan isn’t going to waste warheads nuking Israel. They’re going to be nuking India. Israel-hating is for countries that don’t share a border with their nuclear-armed arch-enemies.
As part of various CBMs with India, neither side actually keeps it’s warheads and launcher mated during normal peacetime operations. From report given to parliament after the 2002 standoff, the Strategic Forces Command can move to full alert within hours.
as per Israel, contrary to what some thing, Israel is not the end all and be all, Pakistan is very unlikey to do anything to Israel unless provoked.
Invite them all to a pancake breakfast to meet the NY Yankees. Surprise! 
By bombing them of course. Total air superiority would be easy to achieve for the US.
My guess is it would never come to that. The threat of ‘being bombed back to the stone age’ has gotten Pakistan to co-operate once. If the threat is serious, they’ll listen. They’re not actually crazy, it only seems like they are. As to the matter of getting all of the weapons? They have a specific military unit that takes care of their nukes. Given the level of concern about the country, I’m sure there’s reasonable intelligence about the unit. Use it to create better inspection protocols.
ETA: BrainGlutton’s idea isn’t a bad one either
No offense, but you don’t understand modern warfare. You can’t conquer a country of 180 million by bombing them. You can’t destroy a military of that size with aerial bombardment. You can’t fly that many missions without having assets in nuke range. I don’t know what else to say. You might as well fly to the moon in a hot air balloon.
Nobody wants to conquer or hold Pakistani territory. The idea is only to threaten or cause enough damage to their conventional assets that they surrender their nuclear ones.
Okay. But it’s still not even remotely possible. Where do you imagine these planes taking off from? The U.S. has some long-range bombers, but nothing like enough to take on a conflict of this magnitude. This isn’t a realistic option.
They would try to save conventional assets by surrendering nuclear ones? Tell me what the hell are you smoking and do you have any left?
An attack on the strategic assets of a nuclear power by whatever means is going to invite massive retaliation, and is going to be construed as a threat to the very existence of said power. Degredation of conventional assets is no biggie compared to a loss of strategic assets.
Carrier groups. Stay out of range of their radar. They can’t hit a moving target on the ocean with the nukes they have, nukes are meant to hit cities, which they know the location of.
Besides, it’d never come to actual conflict. A serious threat would be enough.
Retaliation? How is Pakistan supposed to retaliate against the US?
And, sure I do. Pop over for a toke if you want.
This whole business of ’ threat to the very existence of said power’ is just you buying into the hogwash your military-intelligence complex has been feeding you for decades to get away with their massive budgets. There is no threat to the existence of Pakistan bigger than its own deluded psychopaths.
[QUOTE=bldysabba]
Retaliation? How is Pakistan supposed to retaliate against the US?
[/QUOTE]
There are hundreds of thousands of US troops in the immdiet region. Carrier Groups in the Arabian Sea. Thousands on Diego Garcia. All target able. And that not counting Submarine Bourne Cruise Missiles which the Pakistan Navy has and whose range is essentially limited only by platform endurance.
Any attempt to take it out is not going to be conventional. Its going to be nuclear. You are going to have Trident and MM-III strikes on strategic sites. You are going to have B-2 hunting for mobile launchers (which incidentally was one of the design requirements). Although the USAF destroyed precisely nil launchers in its 2 Gulf Adventures, so this is as much a game of guessing as hitting.
So Indias nuclear weapons are pointed where. Turkey? Australia? Northern Ireland?
No, but you can destroy it.
Not without nukes. And that would kind of ruin our moral high ground. “You can’t be trusted not to use nukes. Therefore, we will use nukes. Oh, shit…”
How did the Vietnam bombing turn out again? The bombing which dropped two or three times the tonnage of all of WWII.