What Are Some Solutions To The Pakistani/Taliban Nuclear Issue?

Over the past few days there have been several articles alerting us to a reality that President Obama tried hard to ignore and dismiss in his Wednesday night, 100 Day Anniversary Press Conference. The problem is that the Taliban in Pakistan have taken over several territories and are between 20-60 miles from Pakistan’s nuclear assets (reports vary). The Pakistani government is also very weak, the Army is corrupt and flush with Taliban sympathizers/collaborators, and even members of the Obama Admin admit that many are just putting a “happy face” on the problem while hoping it goes away (Sec State Clinton is not one of those people-she calls the situation a dire threat to the United States…again, President Obama brushed off questions about how to deal with the matter on Wednesday.)

So, what are Americans to do?

John Bolton writes in the Wall Street Journal that there are two scenarios:

First instability continues to grow; ie, the default scenario that’s most almost a certainty

Second the weak Pakistani government collapses and Taliban extremists take over the nation that’s armed with nuclear weapons.

Sadly, Bolton’s solutions are weak and impotent. Making matters worse, no one else seems to have any suggestions. I do.

History is influenced and even dictated by people who take the initiative, take matters into their own hands, take action. History is made by people who DO, not people who are DONE TO.

To that end, I suggest that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal be removed as soon as possible. How? I prefer that the United States buys it so the money can be used to bolster the weak Pakistani government. Lacking that, direct, strong, military action should be taken:
1) American forces (however many troops are necessary) should be sent to defend the nuclear facilities.
2) If buying or protecting the nukes is not allowed, then they should be destroyed

Is this harsh? Absolutely, but we’re talking about dozens-perhaps hundreds of nuclear weapons that can be taken in a day or so by either the Taliban or the US (as the Pakistanis are not in control). Imagine 100 nuclear weapons smuggled into the United States, into American ports, on planes to American cities, or to American bases overseas. Does anyone doubt the Taliban would like to blow up Rome, Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, or Baghdad? That’s 4 targets with perhaps 100 more to use. The situation is far too dangerous to leave to chance.

It might just be a matter of numbers.
Lose the nukes=lose a city=1000000+ people dead
Buy/protect/destroy/take the nukes=1000 several thousand soldiers

Even if casualties are 10x or 100x worse in protecting or taking the nukes, it’s still 10000-100000x less costly in blood.

Failure to Buy/protect/destroy/take Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal shouldn’t be done unless it looks like it’s in danger, but the problem is…

…it looks like it’s in danger right now. If President Obama does not take DIRECT ACTION to prevent the Taliban from getting a hold of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and materials, then he is 100% to blame because he’s had plenty of opportunity, means, and warning to take that action. We cannot count on the same CIA that let us down on 911, let us down on pre-war Iraq intel, let us down in numerous high-level spy scandals, and continues to go back and forth on Iran’s nuclear assessment. They’re just not that reliable.

Make no bones about it, the Taliban/Al Queda will use nukes if the get em, and that means the decision time is now.

“US experts see Pakistan disintegrating”

“Army fears disintegration if war ordered on Taliban’”

“Despite Taliban turmoil, Pakistan expands nuke plants”

(tons more stories about Pakistan at The Long War Journal)