8 ms·

A. Q. Khan, Father of Pakistan’s Nuclear Bomb, Has Died

15 points by JoeDaDude 5y ago

short12 5y ago
And Indias bomb, the guy sold to everyone. Playboy was one of the first outlets to break that news story and did a hell of a job with indepth coverage. In between the Lindsey Lohan photos obviously
- unmole 5y ago
  > And Indias bomb Yeah, no. India conducted its first test in 1974. Khan Research Laboratories was started in response in 1976.
  - fomine3 5y ago
    Also India is the enemy of Pakistan and the why Pakistan develops nukes. It's really nonsense to help India.
  - short12 5y ago
    He may not have been responsible for their original bomb but he sold a hell of a lot of equipment to improve their program. They were never officially acknowledged by name but we're simply refered to as "another buyer" or similar In honestly surprised the was able to retire and no one assassinated him. Particularly the Israeli...oh there was talk of them buying from him too. He was instrumental in starting new programs but also improving existing ones
    - unmole 5y ago
      There are half a dozen middle powers which would have loved to get their hands on them. India and Israel are the least likely candidates.
      - short12 5y ago
        He was a pretty equal opportunity merchant if death from what I read
        aerostable_slug 5y ago
        The point is that there was nothing he was selling that would be useful to the Israelis (or the Indians, assuming he'd do business with them). Both of these countries have long standing weapons programs that have made progress substantially beyond what Khan could bring to the table.
toomuchtodo 5y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Qadeer_Khan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Qadeer_Khan
crate_barre 5y ago
Dangerous guy, he worked with Libya, Pakistan, Iran and North Korea. The height of amorality.
zeruch 5y ago
Good riddance TBH. His damage to international security will never be repaired.
- vimacs2 5y ago
  You mean his damage to American hegemony, right? They tend to hate it when they can't bully countries with their oversized military so no surprise that they villanise their deterrents. The hypocrisy is pretty sickening if a little amusing. As far as I and the majority of Pakistanis are concerned, he's a hero. Shame for India but it's laughable to suggest that India would not have escalated into a full out ground invasion into Pakistan if they did not have a massive deterrent.
  - CapitalistCartr 5y ago
    Pakistan needs nukes. It's a shallow country, no room for defense in depth, and India is a huge, hostile neighbor. The World would be better off with Libya and North Korea not having nukes.
    - vimacs2 5y ago
      Seems a bit of a weird double standard there. Why exactly should Libya and North Korea not have nukes? They have powerful hostile forces against them as well. India also absolutely required nukes because Pakistan definitely does act the aggressor in several instances. Their army might be smaller but outnumbered does not mean outgunned. Libya got destroyed by American forces because it did not have any real deterrent to invasion and Assad literally allowed NATO in to show he had no weapons of mass destruction only to then be toppled anyway. Seems that playing ball with the Americans does not work as Iran has learned the hard way with Trump breaking their nuclear treaty. It's because America - just like China and other super powers - do not believe that international law applies to them. Might makes right in their eyes, regardless of the pompous self aggrandising crap about freedom and democracy.
      - CapitalistCartr 5y ago

15 points by JoeDaDude 5y ago

And Indias bomb, the guy sold to everyone. Playboy was one of the first outlets to break that news story and did a hell of a job with indepth coverage. In between the Lindsey Lohan photos obviously

unmole 5y ago
> And Indias bomb Yeah, no. India conducted its first test in 1974. Khan Research Laboratories was started in response in 1976.
- fomine3 5y ago
  Also India is the enemy of Pakistan and the why Pakistan develops nukes. It's really nonsense to help India.
- short12 5y ago
  He may not have been responsible for their original bomb but he sold a hell of a lot of equipment to improve their program. They were never officially acknowledged by name but we're simply refered to as "another buyer" or similar In honestly surprised the was able to retire and no one assassinated him. Particularly the Israeli...oh there was talk of them buying from him too. He was instrumental in starting new programs but also improving existing ones
  - unmole 5y ago
    There are half a dozen middle powers which would have loved to get their hands on them. India and Israel are the least likely candidates.
    - short12 5y ago
      He was a pretty equal opportunity merchant if death from what I read
      - aerostable_slug 5y ago
        The point is that there was nothing he was selling that would be useful to the Israelis (or the Indians, assuming he'd do business with them). Both of these countries have long standing weapons programs that have made progress substantially beyond what Khan could bring to the table.

toomuchtodo 5y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Qadeer_Khan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Qadeer_Khan

crate_barre 5y ago

Dangerous guy, he worked with Libya, Pakistan, Iran and North Korea. The height of amorality.

zeruch 5y ago

Good riddance TBH. His damage to international security will never be repaired.

vimacs2 5y ago
You mean his damage to American hegemony, right? They tend to hate it when they can't bully countries with their oversized military so no surprise that they villanise their deterrents. The hypocrisy is pretty sickening if a little amusing. As far as I and the majority of Pakistanis are concerned, he's a hero. Shame for India but it's laughable to suggest that India would not have escalated into a full out ground invasion into Pakistan if they did not have a massive deterrent.
- CapitalistCartr 5y ago
  Pakistan needs nukes. It's a shallow country, no room for defense in depth, and India is a huge, hostile neighbor. The World would be better off with Libya and North Korea not having nukes.
  - vimacs2 5y ago
    Seems a bit of a weird double standard there. Why exactly should Libya and North Korea not have nukes? They have powerful hostile forces against them as well. India also absolutely required nukes because Pakistan definitely does act the aggressor in several instances. Their army might be smaller but outnumbered does not mean outgunned. Libya got destroyed by American forces because it did not have any real deterrent to invasion and Assad literally allowed NATO in to show he had no weapons of mass destruction only to then be toppled anyway. Seems that playing ball with the Americans does not work as Iran has learned the hard way with Trump breaking their nuclear treaty. It's because America - just like China and other super powers - do not believe that international law applies to them. Might makes right in their eyes, regardless of the pompous self aggrandising crap about freedom and democracy.
    - CapitalistCartr 5y ago