|
|
|
|
#2
03-25-2005, 02:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Does any one see a problem with this?
Both India and Pakistan have missiles capable of reaching the other's capital. There's not much reason to put a nuke on an F-16 in this situation because an F-16 can be shot down or otherwise intercepted, but a missile cannot.
I don't think terrorists are too interested in building F-16's, but what do I know? 
|
|
#3
03-25-2005, 03:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Does any one see a problem with this?
Perhaps the original poster was making an ethical point about the sale of weapons of mass destruction and their counterpart delivery systems to Pakistan whose leader is only in power due to a bloody military coup d'état.
Compounding this ethical question might be that it could be seen as hypocritical to be selling these aircraft to Pakistan while America is itself engaged in a war against terrorism and especially to rid that particular region of WMD's. Also Musharref has numerous Islamic friends in the western Pakistani region where Osama bin laden is said to have made a save haven at least once. Or that Musharref granted A.Q. Khan amnesty after having willingly and knowingfully distributed nuclear technology to... Probably doesn't matter. Who wants prozac?
|
|
#4
03-25-2005, 10:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Does any one see a problem with this?
Vulturerow would be a better source than me, but I'd like to throw some info out for you.
F-16s are not exactly new. I believe they were being flown in the 70s. The F-16s main role is not air to ground, yeah they can do it, but it is more suited towards air to air. They already have jets that can carry these weapons. The A-5. They also have Mirages as fighter craft. I doubt they are getting these with fully up to date AF specs. I wouldn't be suprised if they don't even come with a radar. As Much as I like to harp on Bush's administration, this doesn't really bother me. Now if he starts promising Pakistan F/A-22s yea then I'll b*tch Melch
|
|
#6
03-25-2005, 11:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Does any one see a problem with this?
No, those assult rifles must be much more deadly weapons than an F16. According to the experts here, an F16 is pretty much a piece of junk only suitable for crop dusting.
|
|
#8
03-26-2005, 02:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Does any one see a problem with this?
Then you better check with Sam H. and see how Israel destroyed the Iranian nuclear plant, since they used useless F16s on that mission.
[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
|
#9
03-26-2005, 02:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Does any one see a problem with this?
Jeez...earth to Cardcounter.
Are you there? These countries ALREADY have planes that can carry nukes. Selling F16s will not make a nuclear war more likely between these countries. And the primary mission of F16 is as a fighter. F = Fighter (eg F14, F15, F16, F22) B = Bomber (eg B1, B2)
|
|
#10
03-28-2005, 04:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Does any one see a problem with this?
[ QUOTE ]
Then you better check with Sam H. and see how Israel destroyed the Iranian nuclear plant, since they used useless F16s on that mission. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] They actually destroyed an Iraqi nuclear plant, the reactor in Osirak in 1982. It is noteworthy that Space Shuttle Columbia astronaut Ilan Ramon was one of the pilots on that mission.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
