Nuclear Weapons

Drop a Nuke on Afghan-Pakistan Border, Member of House of Lords Suggests

No MAD, no MAD magazine

|

smiling buddha
Indian Ministry of External Affairs

As noted on Reason 24/7 this morning, in defense of a nuclear-armed world in the House of Lords, John Gilbert suggested threatening to drop a neutron bomb on the Afghan-Pakistan border to stop insurgents from crossing. "I am absolutely delighted that nuclear weapons were invented when they were," Lord Gilbert said according to the Huffington Post UK. Gilbert claimed only goat herders occupied the area and that a good nuking would create a "cordons sanitaire," or "quarantine zone."

The former minister of state for defense in Tony Blair's government apparently does not think the concept of mutually-assured destruction applies to Pakistan's conventional nuclear weaponry, which likely can't reach Britain yet, or any speculative dirty bomb detonation it might facilitate. Since Pakistan announced it had developed a nuclear weapon in 1998, there have been no large-scale wars between India and Pakistan. There were three major conflicts between the two countries before India tested a "peaceful" nuclear device in 1974, and countless border incursions and skirmishes since, but few in the last decade. Perhaps Lord Gilbert should have suggested offering Afghanistan nuclear weapons instead. Let's hope Iran doesn't blow it out of proportion.

NEXT: NJ Transportation Officials Say Red-Light Cameras Increase Accidents

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Gilbert claimed only goat herders occupied the area

    Goat “herders”, was it?

    1. The herder is like the madam of the brothel…

    2. He is so glad nukes were invented so they can be used on goat herders….

      The former minister of state for defense in Tony Blair’s government

      Is this guy suffering from dementia?

      1. Is this guy suffering from dementia?

        Yes.

      2. Membership in the British House of Lords is a strong indicator of dementia.

      3. He’s British. What more do you need to know?

  2. So will the US be calling for economic sanctions against the UK under the same logic applied to Iran for similar rhetoric toward Israel?

    1. Will there ever be an end to your asinine false equivalences?

      1. Probably not, but you should check her livejournal for updates.

        1. Stormy is only a “her” when trying to “yiff” horny 14 year old boys.

        2. I like how she protests the Disney take over of Star Wars franchise…

          Cuz we know all the good things Lucus has done with it over the past 20 year…and how impossible it would be for the makers of Toy Story and the Lion King to make good on it.

          Who the hell wants to see a Star Wars movie in which the main character does not murder a room full of children and a Jar Jar Binks that is actually funny?

          1. Toy Story is thanks to Pixar but otherwise I agree.

            1. Pixar was bought by Disney. Toy Story 3, which was critically acclaimed, was made after the purchase.

    2. I don’t think the US should have economic sanctions against Cuba or Iran. they are counter productive.

      So to answer your question: Yes Obama will probably be calling for sanctions against the UK over this.

      1. Of all the people to talk about sanctions!! We’re sanctioning you for claiming the anti-Kickstarter chick is doable.

    3. Stormy Dragon| 11.28.12 @ 5:04PM |#

      So will the US be calling for economic sanctions against the UK under the same logic applied to Iran for similar rhetoric toward Israel?

      While the sentiment is cute = its a little different when a country’s (iran’s) avowed policy – enunciated by its #1 political figure -is the destruction of a neighboring state.

      A former member of government “suggesting threatening”…is a little weaker tea.

      Personally i think the US should have given Pakistan an ultimatum years ago = either join us in united campaign to completely eliminate the TeT/LeT, Massoudis, Haqqani groups in FATA, and track down and kill any remaining Al Q members – OR – we do it ourselves the ugly way.

      I frankly think even with the drone program we’ve been coddling the scumbags.

      1. Since when is Ahmadinejad Iran’s #1 political figure?

        1. oh quit niggling or i nuke you too

      2. enunciated by its #1 political figure

        The problem is that Ahmendimijahd isn’t Iran’s #1 political figure. Being President of Iran is like being Queen of England, it sounds impressive, but you have no actual control over anything. Lord Gilbert, being an actual member of parliament, is has far more actual power than Ahmendimijahd does.

        1. Lord Gilbert, being an actual member of parliament, is has far more actual power than Ahmendimijahd does.

          Nope, a member of the House of Lords has less power. House of Commons, maybe you’d have an argument.

          You might as well argue that the Queen has real power, since technically she could refuse Royal Assent to some law.

        2. That’s not true. Iran’s president does have the power to muss up Iran’s economy. He’s powerful enough that the Ayatollah-who HATES Ahmad-is trying to dislodge him.

          1. Kind of a pointless fight.

            The IRGC is the real power in Iran. Above the regular Armed Forces, above the State and the Government, including Ahmadinejad.

            And, more importantly, now above Khamenei himself since the 2009 sham elections. Ironic, considering Khomeini created the IRCG as a paramilitary force answerable only to the Supreme Leader himself.

          2. But that’s not really relevant to the military or foreign policy, which is controlled by the Supreme Leader, and which is the relevant area of policy here

            1. But that’s not really relevant to the military or foreign policy, which is controlled by the Supreme Leader IRGC top brass, and which is the relevant area of policy here

              FIFY

              1. In any case, it’s not Ahmadinejad

                  1. So Achmadinejad is merely a figurehead. Why does that matter to us? The point is, he is the figurehead that the ayatollahs/IRGC allow to speak for them.

                    So yes, Achmadinejad’s comments about wiping out Isreal do count as Iran’s official policy.

                    Gilbert should be talking about nuking Iran, not the (pointless) AF/PAK border.

  3. I’ve heard worse ideas. But wouldn’t they have to nuke a lot of areas? I think there’s more than 1 pass.

  4. Isn’t this the main plot of that “Last Resort” show?

  5. Won’t the Afghans annihilate the bomb, sending back only a single plutonium atom?

  6. Thats the BEST idea I have heard yet! Drop on on Nigeria at the same time.

    http://www.IP-Fake.com

    1. You are way creepy now, Anonbot. SKYNet not called you up yet?

      1. So now he’s a genocidal pedophile. At this rate, anon-bot is going to be the most despicable person in the world.

    2. Anon-bot makes grammatical and spelling errors in almost every post. Hmmm.

  7. My beliefs about the dangers of inbreeding are confirmed.

    -jcr

  8. Suppose Gary Johnson won the 2012 election. Immediatly he put an open borders libertarian program into place. Taxes went down, imperialism stopped, and all of the world was welcomed enter to our country. Just how many people would immigrate? Look at puerto rico, which has free immigration. 25% of the nation immigrated until we bribed them with welfare to stay home. Doubtless many people from the third world would want to immigrate. What effect would these immigrants have on our country? Unemployment would increase dramatically. Economic growth resulting from libertarian policies would create some jobs, but not enough for the massive onslought of immigrants. How many times can a lawn be mowed? With welfare cut and unemployment high, millions would crowd into homeless shelters. They would get food and shelter, but little else. Many native-born minority Americans would also be hit hard as wages decline to third world levels Meanwhile, I would still have a house, a car, a good job, and intelligent children, and a big tax cut. Do you think that the poor unemployed immigrants, many of whom would not have very high opinions of white Americans like me, would put up with this. Crime would undoubtetly increase. The homeless shelters would be fertile grounds for socialist politics. The Islamic immigrants, unable to be a part of the American dream, would hold on to the views of the old country. A nation of thrid worlders would look like the third world. How hard is that to understand?

      1. You were proud of this one, weren’t you American? Is mommy going to put it on your fridge?

    1. Are you just posting this in every thread, regardless of its relevance?

  9. Unemployment would increase dramatically.

    Crime would increase

    Lies.

    1. But if those are lies, then why has crime increased so dramatically in America since the ’80s, as a result of the Mexican immigration?

      American knows that you simply cannot trust those filthy Mexicans. They come up here, they fill our homeless shelters, they rape the white women and the only thing that spreads faster than their smallpox is their socialism.

      1. “But if those are lies, then why has crime increased so dramatically in America since the ’80s, as a result of the Mexican immigration?”
        Negative correlation does not disprove cauation, idiot. Mexicans commit crime at much greater rates than white Americans. Why has crime declined so much? Firstly, we locked the savages up. Secondly, we aborted a great deal of them.

        1. And we didn’t lock people up before? Crime rates aren’t static things. Why is whatever the current white crime rate the base to measure everything against? Hispanics are also disproportionately male and younger than whites. Two demographic factors that increase crime rates. Heck, the difference in violent crime between the sexes is far greater than the difference between races and ethnicities. Should we just lock up all men?

          1. I guess you are unaware of all the reforms of crime that occured in the 1990s? Hispanic young men commit crime at higher rates than white young men. In your brain you know I’m right.

  10. This is a great idea. I can’t imagine a simpler way to prevent civilian casualties in a war than to kill the civilians in advance.

    1. Sounds like Israel would be on of the first targets by that logic.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.