A Nuclear End to a Nuclear Disaster

Fox News Collective Response:

The Nuclear threat has finally come to an end, but not without weeks of discussions of the United Nations Security Council and many changes in route. At last Pakistani forces did manage to obtain control of their nuclear weapons with the result of only minor radiation. Although this was a favorable result compared to the option of a nuclear world war or the complete environmental destruction of a country, I believe a much better solution could have been achieved if all the countries worked together more efficiently. Throughout the process Israel refused to be helpful in negotiations with the Taliban and insisted on putting their country first when talking of possible solutions. Attacking the arsenals was a very risky thing to do because if the plan wasn’t successful the Taliban would then have a motive for setting of their nuclear bombs. In the future, I believe the better route would be to negotiate with the terrorists to find a solution that would be eliminate environmental destruction and an enraged Taliban.

Preview to Upcoming Security Council Meeting

Ben Spinner

Edited By: Sara Wilson and Elana Nachshin

On Friday May 22, The UN Security Council will meet to solve the current nuclear threat by the Taliban. The Countries must be feeling panic and worried about what the future holds for them. A lot must be made in the next UN security council, as it is important for the countries to make up for lost time. The United States feel it is vital for non violent negotiations to take place. Many countries have believed including Israel that the best way to negotiate with the Taliban is to use violence against them. And other countries feel there should be no negotiation with Terrorists, as they claim no progress will be made and it’s against their beliefs.

I feel it is important for the Countries to find a medium between non violent and violent negotiations. I believe that the Countries should at first use non violent negotiations and ask what the Taliban’s demands are, and see whether they are too severe or possible. If the demands are too harsh, then maybe violent negotiations would come into play. Violent negotiations could include, bombing Pakistan or sending troops into Pakistan to fight the Taliban. The Security Council must work with the Taliban at first and see how much they cooperate.

A Select Few Show Competence in this Time of Crisis

By: Sara Wilson

Edited by: Elana NachshinToday Fox News got the rare chance to interview a great number of leaders of countries involved in the decision making process regarding the current nuclear threat.  And of course, it is our job to report to you what was involved in those meetings in order for you to further understand the situation.  In having intimate interviews one after another it is easy to get a feel for how each leader measures up to the competition and their attitude coming in, be it confident, ambivalent, anxious.

To start off the day, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sat down with us to discuss his plan of action.  He beamed confidence from the second he arrived, and necessarily too, since what he had to say was hardly inventive.   When asked about his thoughts on the demands of the Taliban, he said “As of having a Muslim state I don’t have much control over that”.  Yes, maybe Ahmadinejad doesn’t have direct control over the negotiations with the Taliban, but why would he be involved in the numerous meetings discussing a resolution if he didn’t have any say.  In combating terrorists it is highly difficult to have control, but it is simply a wise decision to know your stance on matters of high importance.

We later got the chance to talk to President Medveddev, the leader of Russia.  He was obviously a bit uneasy throughout the interview and rather unsure of himself and his ideas.  One of his first ideas was the have a joint UN force go into Pakistan to help retain possession of the nuclear weapons and added that “it wouldn’t really be invading since our troops all together would be helping out”.  First of all, the Pakistani government doesn’t want other nations’ troops in Pakistan as they feel it would cause more of a problem and aggravate the terrorists even more.  Most of the residents of Pakistan would not be pleased with UN troops throughout their country and that would bring a high risk of casualties and unnecessary danger.  Similar to the situation with the United States and Iraq, the US sees themselves as trying to help while the Iraqi people feel invaded and threatened.  Overall, president Medveddev’s ideas were simply creative but lacking any realistic aspect regarding the current situation. 

Our interview with England’s leader was much different however as Gordon Brown showed he had a firm grasp on what is going on around him and his proper position in regards to his nation and the rest of the UN.  He makes no ridiculous decisions as he says, “I have put my troops on the Pakistani border purely for defense and to insure that the nuclear missiles stay where they are so they don’t become a bigger threat.  We are not taking an aggressive position at this time but rather simply protecting Pakistan’s neighbors”.  England has taken the proper stance as they highly support negotiations while taking small steps to protect their fellow nations. 

Throughout all our interviews, we at Fox News got the chance to dig into the minds of these leaders as they showed their true colors.  It is helpful to point out which countries know what they’re doing and have a firm plan of action as opposed to those countries that are simply going through the motions and have no real contributions of their own.

In the Mind of the Enemy

Op-ed

By: Elana Nachshin

Edited By: Sara WilsonThe current nuclear situation in Pakistan has stimulated infinite discussions around the world. Throughout the duration of the conflict the world has closely monitored the decisions, deliberations and tribulations experienced as the world’s leaders have worked tirelessly to alleviate the current crisis. Every day brings new challenges, and with these challenges come intense media scrutiny and awareness of the affected superpowers. However, despite being the origin for conflict, the universal attention wave appears to have narrowly avoided exclusive Taliban coverage altogether. We at Fox News wish to provide the much-needed insight into the minds of the radicals, coverage that has previously been strictly avoided by our competitors. 

In order for the world to fully understand the current situation, it is imperative to first comprehend the enemy. This comprehension can only come from a solid understanding the adversary’s rationale. During an exclusive interview with the Taliban and today’s media day, it was revealed that the Taliban possesses strongly-held justifications for their actions. In the opinion of the Taliban, their previously proposed threats are rationalized by their possession of “an entire Muslim population to protect”. In their view, this population would benefit greatly from both the institution of their version of Sharia law and the possession of “the holy land”. 

The Taliban hold very strong to the belief that what their population needs most is the tenure of “strong, Muslim leaders”. (This profession clearly states their discontent for the current political leaders in the Islamic world, namely those of Iran and Pakistan.) It is made very clear that, in the eyes of the Taliban, these motivating factors justify both the threatened violence and the seizure of nuclear weapons from a Muslim nation.  When pressed, the Taliban representatives noted that they do not relish the idea of using the apprehended nuclear weapons.  However they will use them, if necessary, to ensure that that their demands are met. (Of course, as always, barring the harm of innocent civilians). The threat, therefore, is a real one as the Taliban has firmly placed itself among the enemies of freedom.

Furthermore the Taliban strongly believes that they are not, in any sense of the word, terrorists.  When asked to define the word “terrorist”, the Taliban representative replied that in their minds, a terrorist is one who invades foreign soil (without just cause), enforces military control over foreign peoples and oppresses a group of individuals.  The Taliban seriously insists that it is not a terrorist organization, despite, in world opinion, their demonstration of many of the described qualities. However, the Taliban does express that in regards to the believed extremist criteria, prominent nations such as the United States, China and Great Britain are in fact terrorists. In the Taliban estimation, the United States and Britain are terrorist nations for their involvement in the war on terror and the presence of their troops in Middle Eastern countries, and China for its past “imperialism and oppression of its own people.” Clearly, this a war of words and not just nuclear weapons.

Editors note: The views and opinions expressed in this op-ed in no way represent the beliefs of Fox News or its affiliates. This piece is simply to provide a rare insight into the minds of the (not) Terrorists. 

The UN keeps us waiting

By: Ben Spinner

Edited By: Elana Nachshin

On May 15^th,   the United Nation’s security council met in an effort to continue negotiations relating to the developing situation in Pakistan.  However after a long meeting, no solutions was reached and after the meeting ended the countries were back to where they started. Many countries including India argued that they wanted other countries to put some additional pressure on Pakistan and “disarm them as quickly as possible”. But it seemed as the meeting progressed ideas were thrown out with out a plan. Iran also notes “we must stop this situation before it becomes a true nuclear crisis” but fail to explain the steps and the process they are going to take to ease the situation. On the other hand Israel seemed to acknowledge that they are in imminent danger and seemed willing to negotiate just as France did also.  Israel does a solid job of explaining what they are willing to do to ease the Taliban and they “suggest to install more troops on the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan”. This idea is a justifiable first step for a country like Israel to make. During the Security Council, Israel seemed to be one of the few countries that wanted to take quick steps in negotiating with the Taliban. 

Also during the Security Council, countries seemed to give the Pakistani government and military too much credit. Countries seemed to trust the Pakistani military despite failures with Pakistan in the past. Although Pakistan seemed reassuring that their military and government were up for a challenge, we can not leave an inexperienced Pakistani government to take up the challenge of the Taliban. Pakistan has failed to realize what the Taliban is capable off and it has hurt there government to this point. 
 

In the middle of the Security Council, the media received word another terrorist bombing allegedly occurred  in England by the Taliban, but the bomb was detonated. Without much progress in the Security Council, people should be worried about another attack. It is important for the Security Council to come up with an agreement, and to make sure no more terrorist attacks happen  At the end of the security council, the Taliban leader gave reassurance that they had the proper launch codes to the missiles. Although there is no proof this is true, the Security Council must be scared because the Taliban and Nuclear weapons mean no good. The next UN Security council must have quick negotiations and realize innocent lives are at stake. 

England: A Reasonable Force

As things start to get heated in the United Nations Security Council, England poses a realistic approach.  Rather than shutting down all options involving negotiations with the Taliban, England has suggested that, “In order to create a viable option or solution to this problem that was set before us, we must, as the UN Security Council, decide to negotiate with terrorists in this instance because in the past, terrorists have not had nuclear capabilities.”  One would hope that other countries would realize that alternative steps may be necessary in this case due to the fatalities involved if nuclear weapons were used. 

It is understood that it is part of many countries ethics to avoid consultations with terrorist organizations, but at some point comes the decision weather it is better to maintain your values or protect your country from a nuclear disaster.  By refusing to negotiate with the Taliban, a decision may not be made by the deadline given, which would result in a horrible situation potentially leading to another World War.

With Israel and India being the foremost targets of a nuclear Taliban, it would be reasonable to think that they would want to solve this problem as quickly and agreeably as possible.  This in fact doesn’t seem to be the case as Israel’s leader states defiantly that, “Israel will not negotiate with the terrorists.”  So the question is, how does Israel plan to combat this grave threat to their country? Rising up with the United Nations? Maybe, but as England’s Prime Minister had said in his response to the United Nations security council meeting, “it is completely necessary to negotiate with [the Taliban]”.  England has shown competent problem solving skills in the past, and it is time to follow their lead in order to shield the world from a serious global threat.

By: Sara Wilson

Pakistan Lies to Conceal World Treat

By: Elana Nachshin

Earlier this evening Fox News received highly credible information, via a reliable anonymous source, which proves to discredit this statement made by Pakistani Officials at yesterdays UN council:

            "First off, the weapons that the Taliban have taken control of, Shaheen II nuclear missiles, have a maximum range of 2,500 kilometers or roughly 1,550 miles. This puts targets such as Jerusalem, Beijing,  Shanghai, Hong Kong, Chongquing and Moscow out of range. Also the missiles burn liquid fuel, this means that they would have to be fueled on the launch pads, a process that will take several hours. If the Taliban choose to take the offensive and fuel the weapons we will have plenty of time to call in an air strike to destroy the missiles before they can be deployed."

 

Discrediting this statement made by Pakistani President Zaradi, is Fox New's recent discovery that the Taliban is in control of recently devolved Nuclear Technology that surpasses the capabilities of "the Shaheen II".  Highly advanced technology, that has been identified as "the Shaheen III". The Shaheen III is a Pakistani- developed, modern ballistic missile, capable of damage exponentially greater than that of ghthe Shaheen II. It was earlier believed, due to the Shaheen II’s minimal range of roughly 1550 miles, that the potential damage was limited at best. However, with the Taliban’s control over the Shaheen III, capable of traveling approximately 4500 kilometers, the likelihood of a nuclear catastrophe is greatly increased.  It is understood that with the use of the Shaheen III, the following major countries are now at risk:

-Israel, Russia, China, India, France and everything in between.

Also discrediting Pakistan’s statement, is the Shaheen III’s ability run on solid fuel. This development means that it is no longer a necessity for the Taliban to devote numerous hours fueling missiles on the launch pads, and abolishes the only previous legitimate defense tactic.

This development leaves the Fox News Affiliates appalled at Pakistan’s blatant miss-statement.  Continued coverage will, as always, remain Fair and Balanced, as the prolonged safety world hangs in the balance.