Bin Ladens Revenge: American Hiroshima

The danger of a nuclear conflict comes from radicalized individuals within the states.

1. .
2. .
3. Social Sustainability: A Multilevel Approach to Social Inclusion (Routledge Advances in Sociology)?
4. Moonbeams And Magic.
5. .
6. Strike one!
7. Will Nukes Be Next in Terrorist Arsenal?.

Although Pakistan's military government insisted that there was no danger of any of its nuclear weapons being taken for a ride by some radical Islamic group, it wasn't taking any chances. Shortly after the U. This nervousness was not unjustified — two strongly Islamist generals of the Pakistan army, close associates of Gen. Pervez Musharraf, had just been removed. Dissatisfaction within the army concerning Pakistan's betrayal of the Taliban was and is deep.

Almost overnight, under intense U. Today, the United States lives in fear of the bomb it created, because the decision to use it has already been made. Pious men with beards will decide when and where on U. Shadowy groups, propelled by fanatical hatreds, scour the globe for materials. They are not in a hurry. Time is on their side.

They are doubtless confident they will one day breach Fortress America. The possibilities for nuclear attack are not limited to the so-called suitcase bomb stolen from the arsenal of a nuclear state. In fact, getting and exploding such a bomb is far more difficult than the use of improvised nuclear devices fabricated from highly enriched uranium, constructed in the very place where they will eventually be detonated. Still more likely is an attack on a vulnerable nuclear reactor or spent fuel repository.

Some nuclear weapons experts say privately that it is not a question of if but when the attack will happen. This may be too pessimistic, but tighter policing and monitoring of nuclear materials and rapid reduction of stockpiles and nuclear weapons knowledge must be the first step. There should not be the slightest delay in moving on this. But this is far from sufficient. If nuclear weapons continue to be accepted by nuclear weapon states as legitimate instruments of deterrence or war, their global proliferation — whether by other states or non-state actors — can only be slowed at best.

Coercive nonproliferation will only serve to drive up demand. Nonproliferation by cooperation and consent cannot succeed as long as the United States insists on retaining and improving its nuclear arsenal. By what reasonable argument can others be persuaded to give up, or not acquire, nuclear weapons? So what will happen when religious fanatics succeed in a nuclear attack? The world shall plunge headlong into a bottomless abyss of reaction and counter-reaction in a horror the human mind cannot comprehend.

Who will the United States retaliate against?

Will the United States nuke Mecca? The capitals of Muslim states? What will the United States and its allies do as their people fear more attacks? Hiroshima signaled a failure of humankind, not just of the United States. The growth of technology has far outstripped our ability to use it wisely. Like a quarrelling group of monkeys on a leaky boat, armed with sticks of dynamite, we are embarked on an uncertain journey.

Humanity's best chance of survival lies in creating taboos against the manufacture of nuclear weapons — such as those that already exist for chemical and biological weapons — and to work rapidly toward their global elimination. Pervez Hoodbhoy is a member of the Pugwash Council and is professor of nuclear and high-energy physics at Quaid-e-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan.

The desire for an atomic weapon to seek vengeance — utterly immoral, foolish and suicidical though it be — is not limited to extremists. The Islamic Bomb is a concept that is becoming ever more popular. The notion of an Islamic Bomb had existed long before Addressing posterity from his death cell in a Rawalpindi jail, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the architect of Pakistan's nuclear program, wrote in The Christian, Jewish, and Hindu civilizations have this capability.

The communist powers also possess it. Only the Islamic civilization was without it, but that position was about to change. Another Muslim leader stressed the need for a bomb belonging collectively to Islam.

• Will Nukes Be Next in Terrorist Arsenal?;
• Hamza bin Laden?
• The Original eBook Torch.
• En enfance (FICTION) (French Edition)?
• WikiLeaks docs: Nuclear reprisals if bin Laden killed.
• ?
• Das Schwert des Ostens: Krimi (Rock Rockenschaub 1) (German Edition).

In the celebrations following the nuclear tests, the Jamaat-e-Islami paraded bomb and missile replicas through the streets of Pakistani cities. It saw in the Bomb a sure sign of a reversal of fortunes and a panacea for the ills that have plagued Muslims since the end of the Golden Age of Islam.

Navigation menu

In , I captured on video the statements of several leaders of jihadist, right-wing political parties in Pakistan — Maulana Khalil-ur-Rahman and Maulana Sami-ul-Haq — who also demanded a bomb for Islam. But nothing in the history of Pakistan has shown a substantial commitment to a pan-Islamic cause. Pakistan, so far the only Muslim nuclear state, is unlikely to risk devastating retaliation from Israel or the United States if it did attempt to provide nuclear weapons for use in the Middle East. Its earlier clandestine nuclear cooperation with Iran — officially attributed to the antics of Dr.

Abdul Qadeer Khan and his network — came to an end a decade ago. This was followed by similar sales to Libya that continued till and the exposure of the network, leading to a public confession by A. Khan in early In my opinion, the danger of a nuclear conflict comes not from Muslim states, but from radicalized individuals within the states.

Several weapons were reportedly airlifted to various safer, isolated, locations within the country, including the northern mountainous area of Gilgit. This nervousness was not unjustified — two strongly Islamist generals of the Pakistan Army, close associates of General Musharraf, had just been removed. Both scientists were well known to espouse radical Islamic views.

Share your voice

Mahmood had even been photographed with Osama Bin Laden. But this time around business suits will be absent. Pious men with beards will decide when and where on American soil atomic weapons are to be used. Shadowy groups, propelled by fanatical hatreds, scour the globe for fissile materials. They are not in a hurry; time is on their side. They are doubtless confident they will one day breach Fortress America.

Shall it will be by the end of the century? The possibilities for nuclear attack are not limited to the so-called suitcase bomb stolen from the arsenal of a nuclear state. In fact, this is far more difficult than the use of improvised nuclear devices fabricated from highly enriched uranium, constructed in the very place where they will eventually be detonated. Still more likely is an attack on a vulnerable nuclear reactor or spent fuel repository. Some nuclear weapon experts who I am not at liberty to name privately believe that it is not a question of if but when the attack is to happen.

This may be too pessimistic, but obviously tight policing and monitoring of nuclear materials and rapid reduction of stockpiles and nuclear weapons knowledge must be the first step. There should not be the slightest delay in moving on this. But this is far from sufficient.

Osama bin Laden

If nuclear weapons continue to be accepted by nuclear weapon states as legitimate instruments of either deterrence or war, their global proliferation — whether by other states or non-state actors — can only be slowed down at best. Coercive non-proliferation will only serve to drive up demand.

Non-proliferation by cooperation and consent cannot succeed as long as the US is insistent on retaining and improving its nuclear arsenal — by what reasonable argument can others be persuaded to give up, or not acquire, nuclear weapons? If we accept that religious fanatics are planning nuclear attacks and that they may eventually succeed, then what?

The world shall plunge headlong into a bottomless abyss of reaction and counter reaction whose horror the human mind cannot comprehend. Who will the US retaliate against? Will the US nuke Mecca? The capitals of Muslim states? Hiroshima signaled a failure of humankind, not just that of America. The growth of technology has far outstripped our ability to use it wisely. Like a quarrelling group of monkeys on a leaky boat, armed with sticks of dynamite, we are now embarked on an uncertain journey.

We cannot afford to live in a savage dog-eat-dog world. Instead, we must dare to imagine and work urgently towards a future that is based on universal, compassionate, human, secular values. For this to happen, the civilized world will have to subdue the twin ogres of American imperialism and Islamic radicalism.