'Why not an Islamic bomb?': How Israel planned and failed to stop Pakistan going nuclear

[Baadil]

Socioeconomics knows NO religion, since as far as it is concerned, it simply does not matter what religion is being followed. Religion is thus immaterial for socioeconomics; it is irrelevant. Hence my statement remains correct.

I'm not sure I follow. Religion affects social morality, social norms, economic norms, demographics, etc. Almost certainly, you don't mean that religion has no bearing on socioeconomics, and what you mean is that a modern country will be dealing with certain socioeconomic factors regardless of the religion of the populace. We can agree on that, as we can agree we are human beings.

Following from that, on what foundational, objective principles do we look for the absolute best solution to socioeconomic issues? If socioeconomic issues a people grapple with irrespective of their religion, does that mean that there is no solution to socioeconomic problems within religion?

If we are to evaluate Zia's policies and their bearing on the Pakistan that developed its nuclear weapons, we should consider the method in which we critique them.

 

[VCheng]

I'm not sure I follow. Religion affects social morality, social norms, economic norms, demographics, etc. Almost certainly, you don't mean that religion has no bearing on socioeconomics, and what you mean is that a modern country will be dealing with certain socioeconomic factors regardless of the religion of the populace. We can agree on that, as we can agree we are human beings.

Following from that, on what foundational, objective principles do we look for the absolute best solution to socioeconomic issues? If socioeconomic issues a people grapple with irrespective of their religion, does that mean that there is no solution to socioeconomic problems within religion?

If we are to evaluate Zia's policies and their bearing on the Pakistan that developed its nuclear weapons, we should consider the method in which we critique them.

We can take this discussion elsewhere to avoid taking this thread off topic.

As I showed earlier, all these claims about Israeli plan to take out Pakistani nukes were based off an Indian politician and not credible at all.

 

[Aryan_B]

The thing is Egypt imo is a neo colony of America. The Egyptian people voted for Morsi. Egyptian policies to Turkey Iran changed. The Americans and west supported military in Egypt to take over. America pays 2.2 billion to the generals they deliver,

Same in Jordan they get 500 million and keep mongrel in power.

In saudi if they showed any independence Salman would be assassinated overnight and another member of that godforsaken family would be put on the throne

 

[Watandar]

In saudi if they showed any independence Salman would be assassinated overnight and another member of that godforsaken family would be put on the throne

As we saw with King Faisal.

 

[Rational Philosopher]

On a related note, how “Islamic” his policies actually were should be evaluated as well, based on fact and not opinion, and definitely not evaluated through a liberal-defaultist lens

Essentially this is an extension of the "no true scotsman" fallacy, no different to how communists justify the failure of communism around the world by saying we haven't had a  true communist regime because you see the state did XYZ and this isn't truly communist in nature.

The fact is that majority of what Zia enacted was in line with political Islamist opinion, was supported by the religious clergy and his Islamist support base, and most importantly done in the name of religion. Therefore we can conclude, in practise this is how the typical religious "revolutionaries" play out in Pakistan, regardless of getting into the nitty gritty technicals to attempt to absolve them of absolutely any ownership.

The religious clergy in Pakistan in particular is infamous for weaponising their religious authority to abuse the system for personal gain, from daily corruption, to sexual abuse in religious seminaries, to politics, and every other domain where they simply have no justification or qualifications to be giving their opinion in. A mullah will speak try to control the education system, the economy, industry, politics; but will have zero expertise in any apart from a religious badge that is irrelevant. An outdated dogmatic mindset that refuses to understand evolving contextual realities and is extremely rigid in its regressive thought to the point of becoming hostile to anyone who challenges their opinion. When you prioritise religious rigidity over domain expertise, you get decay.

The technical hyper-details are in practise irrelevant here, because how it actually plays out in reality is representative of the above. Just like true communism arguments can't be used to absolve the failure of most communist setups, true "Islamic" arguments can't be used to absolve the failure of political Islamist set ups in practise. It's an outdated dogmatic system that is hostile to reforms and modern education.

In this context, if we were to consider secularist, nationalistic, or any non-religious model, the degree of abuse and room for reform is of a far greater capacity because without abusing religious authority, their ability to fool the masses is limited. Religion becomes the perfect tool to pacify the illiterate masses to your own rule, and crush any basic criticism. This is far more difficult to do in non-religious political systems like secular democracies because religious authority does not have the power to stifle or intervene in areas outside of their specific domain.

@VCheng

 

[Bharatah]

In the 1980s Israel even formulated a plan to bomb Pakistan’s nuclear site with Indian assistance - a scheme that the Indian government eventually backed out of.

This wasn't only in 1980; this also happened now in 2025. Note that weeks before "Israel" attacked Iran, India attacked Pakistan! This was a coordinated attack, the goal being to generate an event that would result in the denuclearization of Pakistan. Modi is directly linked to Netanyahu and the Likud party.

NOTE: THEY WILL TRY AGAIN.

 

[Lulldapull]

This wasn't only in 1980; this also happened now in 2025. Note that weeks before "Israel" attacked Iran, India attacked Pakistan! This was a coordinated attack, the goal being to generate an event that would result in the denuclearization of Pakistan. Modi is directly linked to Netanyahu and the Likud party.

NOTE: THEY WILL TRY AGAIN.

He doesn't know diddly.....look at the name he's chosen to be here with.......lol.

Hendu-pak convert looking for a new daddy no?

 

[Bharatah]

He doesn't know diddly.....look at the name he's chosen to be here with.......lol.

Hendu-pak convert looking for a new daddy no?

My friend, i'm not indian or hindu . I'm Brazilian(and islamic), I don't have any kind of relationship with Indians or Hindus, nor do I know anyone there.

 

[Watandar]

My friend, i'm not indian or hindu . I'm Brazilian(and islamic), I don't have any kind of relationship with Indians or Hindus, nor do I know anyone there.

Wow...OT but how did you become Muslim in Brazil ?

 

[Baadil]

regardless of getting into the nitty gritty technicals to attempt to absolve them of absolutely any ownership.

This is called beating around the bush. It’s convenient but unreasonable to make dismissals without evaluating the actual details. Otherwise, I don’t see how we can make the distinction between conjecture and reasoned analysis.

The technical hyper-details are in practise irrelevant here, because how it actually plays out in reality is representative of the above.

The opposite is true, because even secular ideologies will have adherents that implement them with varying degrees of conformity to their principles as you seem to agree on. And your comparisons between communism and Islamic system of rule do not address the foundational principles of both. Islam is claimed to be from God, so it should be evaluated whether this claim is true or false. That is the rational thing to do.

if we were to consider secularist, nationalistic, or any non-religious model, the degree of abuse and room for reform is of a far greater capacity because without abusing religious authority, their ability to fool the masses is limited.

Do you have evidence for secular-defaultism? And what property of time makes its passing the prime adjudicator for evaluating how good a system of governance is?

Also, again, it’s convenient yet unreasonable to make dismissals [of religion] without evaluating the details, most importantly the foundational principles. It’s easy yet unreasonable to put all religions in one basket. Islam calls to draw from the Quran, the Sunnah, the ways of the Pious predecessors. Non-religious models rely on their own clergy, drawing inspiration from subjective moral. Difference being, the source material for one will always be from fallible humans, whilst the other will claim to be from an infallible source. This claim should be scrutinised and if found to be true, the system drawing from an infallible source will always be superior even if its adherents draw from it imperfectly. In that case, reforms enacted through scrutiny from a secular paradigm will exclusively bring harm. Particularly, countries in the Western world are bearing the fruits of moral, social degradation which will continue to worsen if they wilfully diverge from what Islam claims is their innate disposition.

We should evaluate why we may default to “Modernity” as the measure for progress, and avoid making convenient but unreasonable, irrational generalisations and assumptions.