Do you think that Israel is going to become more worried about Pakistan's nuclear power now

[LittleApple81]

with all these problems in India?
The world is so absolutely crazy. The things that are done in the name of religion boggles the mind (all religions).

[H2O Man]

1. I think that everyone will.

This is an ugly, dangerous situation.

[malaise]

2. I am just as worried about

Israel's nukes.

[LittleApple81]

4. Agree. When Israel becomes worried, they tend to take unilateral (at least officially) action.

That is why it worries me even more.

[cali]

6. Israel is a more stable country than Pakistan

which is moving ever closer to failed state status.

[H2O Man]

8. Last night, I spoke

with a friend who lived in India, Pakistan and Afghanistan for about two decades. He said that in order for me to really understand Pakistan, I had to think of it as being a nation where lerge sections were ruled by the types of groups that the Southern Poverty Law Center investigates in our country.

[closeupready]

10. Yet, how many sovereign countries has Israel officially attacked? And Pakistan?

I think paradoxically, the historical facts reflect the reality that less stable Pakistan has more to fear from stable Israel than the other way around.

[cali]

14. It's a complex situation. yes, there's lots to condemn Israel for

but most of those attacks hardly happened in a vacume. And sorry, an unstable country with nukes is more dangerous than a stable one. And again the real nuclear problem in SE Asia is between Pakistan and India. In the ME, it's certainly fair to say that Israel is the nuclear problem.

[cali]

3. As H2O man points out

many countries will have increasing levels of concern. First among them, of course, is India.

[LittleApple81]

5. The whole thing is just awful. It makes me feel so sad...

[Recursion]

13. Which means China is concerned

Nuclear armament is pretty simple game theory. We abrogate our own treaties (developed in the light of game theory) and start working on a missile defense system. This breaks the then-standing equilibrium and gives Russia an incentive to increase its nuclear arsenal. This in turn gives China an incentive to increase its arsenal. This, in turn, India. And India, Pakistan.

It's the same fundamental misunderstanding that Reagan had with SDI: no defense system can make the underlying game zero-sum, so the (much more complex and in this case troubling) Nash equilibria apply rather than the classical deterministic or mixed equilibria, particularly since the primary Nash equilibrium in this case is a Malthusian sort of exponential arms race.

[closeupready]

7. Pakistan has more reason to be scared of Israel's nuclear missiles

than Israel does of Pakistan's, IMO. And actually, that applies to most of the states which have been invaded and/or threatened by Israel over the last 30 years or so. Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Iraq and elsewhere.

Now, having said that, those other states have lots of problems of their own, so I am not saying that Pakistan is 'better' than Israel (wouldn't even know what saying something like that means). I often look at the whole Middle East as just a big hell-hole, populated with bad actors.

The sooner peace is made with the Palestinians, the sooner hostilities can start to be put behind everyone.

[cali]

12. Israel is not going to attack Pakistan with nukes

And unless certain Pakistani elements take control, Pakistan is not going to attack Israel. The greater concern is the tense relationship between India and Pakistan.

[MannyGoldstein]

9. I Can't Wait For Iran To Have Also Nukes

Gives me a warm feeling inside... a nuclear glow...

[HereSince1628]

11. What worries me is the proportionality constant that is at play...

When a nation is victim to a terrorist attack, it must retaliate. And the retaliation must be a 100s if not 100,000s fold greater than the original attack. That retaliation is bound to create entirely new fields for vendettas which will rage for millenia.

War is supposed to be a means to the resolution of political and economic strife. There is nothing to be resolved in terms of political or economic objectives that can come from military retaliations against terrorists.

[GoesTo11]

15. How about massive humanitarian aid to Pakistan in exchange for disarming?

Deal: If they will give up nukes, they can become prosperous and healthy. Win-win.

And yes, Israel should be worried now. If nutjobs get control of the weapons there, there's no telling what they'd do with them. And no, Pakistan shouldn't be worried about Israel in the same way. If Israel was trigger-happy with nukes, we'd know it by now.

[malaise]

16. What if the West stops slaughtering Pakistanis

and writing it off as collateral damage while they're looking for a dead Osama Bin Laden.
I am just sick of the slaughter of humanity wherever.

And yes H2O Man is correct about aspects of Pakistan's history.
I can't help wondering if this is not connected to the bombing of that school a while back and the recent bombing of the hotel in Pakistan. That hotel bombing was a very strange event.