Terrorism is Nobody's Monopoly

#192 by bongdongs

I think Rocca`s reacquizition program failed because Pakistan already had its own program going long before Rocca got there.

You are indeed perceptive.

Pak had a large reverse engineering programme, so one doesn`t really know what they have from the Afghan war ... maybe even cruise missiles ...

(ROTFL Ikan)

#194

the launchers are reuseable, but you cannot effectively use 3000 missiles with only 20 launchers.

and the quote is from Mohammed Yousuf himself. Unless you are the ghost of ISI-DG Akhar Rehman himself, I can think of no more authentic source.

very impressed with the name dropping going on!

#194

``it means that a launcher can fire only three of four missiles ``

it means that a launcher can fire only three OR four missiles

#182,
You know my rule. I don’t discuss with idiots. But here I will make an exception. The launchers are reusable. I don’t know how reliable the ISI guy is. Provide me some official US source. I am estimating 15-20 but from what I know the launch was highly controlled and there is no specification out there that tells me that the launcher is not useable after X number of launches. If I go with your claim, it means that a launcher can fire only three of four missiles



• It is a lightweight, portable weapon. The missile and its launcher weigh about 35 pounds (15 kg). The launcher is reusable. Each missile is a sealed unit that weighs only 22 pounds (10 kg).
• It is a shoulder-launched weapon, and one person can launch a Stinger missile (although you normally see a two-man team operating the missile).
• It uses a passive infrared seeker.
• It is a fire-and-forget weapon.

``even us macaca`s are not so stupid``

Yes they are!

#183 by no name fool ...

Abey nabaligh ... ok let me spill the beans .... for everyone`s itch ...

Those 500 stingers plus any launchers are STILL in the possession of Pak. The Americans THOUGHT they had blown these up, but do you think they were really in the warehouse where the Paks told them they were ?

LoL ... Paks aren`t stupid.

(ROTFL Ikan)

#190

as a corollary, I think Rocca`s reacquizition program failed because Pakistan already had its own program going long before Rocca got there.

Somehow, when it is convienint the chinese are great friends and name dropping is the name of the game. at other times they are forgotten. Surely there must some quid pro quo somewhere for all the chinese help, one point the study of the cruise missile wihch fizzled. There surely must be other instances where pakistan provided the help.

This was also the time when Clinton etc were under pressure to pull the plug on china, the taiwan straits tensions, etc etc.

#185

if you ask me Stingers were too precious a resource for Pakistani Army to sell. I would think that Pakistan supplied the systems to only their most trusted ally (Hekmatyar). For instance Masood is said to have received only 8 missiles and 1 launcher. This was done so that the Pakistani army could retain a large number of the systems as they passed through Ojhri and reaquire them back from Hekmatyar once the war was over.

Pakistan`s rapid development of the Anza MANPAD in the early 90`s also has some relevance to the story.

Real beuties aren`t they?

ah well, its here:

FIM-92 stinger and launcher

#184 by bongdongs

LoL .. try wiki ...

#182 by bongdongs
Yes yes. You don`t have to rub it in. Stingers do require a launching mechanism but it is light and shoulder carried. I got HP`s point that the Americans did not provide so many launchers so the 500 missiles would have been useless without them.

But the question intensifies. If the Pak army sold the stingers, who would have bought them without the launchers? And if they didn`t sell them, where are they?

In the end it proves my point. The Americans blew them up because Paks did have a few launchers as HP has stated.

FIM-92 Stinger and launcher

#182 that is a lot of technical information for the fool (and no not HP)....

however, both of them need to enroll for a reading comprehension 101 course