[Quix]

THANKS TONS FOR YOUR EXCELLENT ANALYSIS.

Poohbah has said similar things about yield. And, I have no doubt you are both accurate.

Nevertheless, the fact of any nuke successfullying exploding would galvanize citizens, legislators and leaders alike.

And 10's of thousands dead is still greater than 9/11; which was plenty bad, IMHO.

But it would be less than 10's of millions.

OTOH, take Manhattan . . . assume there ARE 20+ "suitcase" nukes well maintained and ready to go . . .

Assume that 5-8 of them (or even 3-4 of them) are arranged around critical points in Manhattan . . .

It seems to me that it could get . . . at least messy.

Certainly 1-3 could make a mess of critical areas of DC.

Isn't that fairly right?

[bonesmccoy]

Quix,

The stuff posted here on FR regarding low-yield fission weapons suggests that the number of such devices is very small. The assembly and testing of such a weapon would be highly specialized work and those engineers would be obvious individuals in international scientific or engineering circles.

For such weapons to escape detection by our nation would be a huge sign of failed intel. The intel reports (hard to figure if they're correct or just disinformation) that showed up on FR were saying that the Russians had some devices of interest. If Putin's regime can not control their own devices, it would put his regime in serious jeopardy because the Russian people (who now vote on such matters) would be upset that their weapons were used on US civilians. I am not so concerned of such weapons.

I am more troubled by the possibility that North Korean produced devices would be traded by NorKor to AQ or AQ-aligned nations. The device would be shipboard and if placed in a shipping container, could be loaded and off-loaded. You would hope that inspections of containers in foreign ports with US destinations would identify such containers.

So, no, I disagree with your scenario. The likelihood that a private terror cell has several low yield weapons under it's control would be very unlikely. If AQ possessed such weapons, wouldn't there be other targets that would be of higher leverage?

The other thought is that if only one device is used and then followed by a secondary, it suggests more devices exist.

That would truly be the terror that "Daleel" seems to be suggesting.

Because the cities are so large, the likelihood of being caught up in the initial attack is very unlikely, unless you routinely work or live near civic centers of LA, Chicago, NYC, or DC.

Low yield nuclear fission devices do not seem to be useful in Washington DC. The reason is that the buildings are made of marble/stone and spaced by miles. Even if you detonated a low-yield device at Lincoln Memorial, the impact of a 1-2 kt weapon would be minimal at the Pentagon or Capitol Hill. So, I doubt that an enemy would use such devices there. The use of such a horrible weapon would need to be likely to deal a lethal first-strike attack.

Since AQ is on it's death bed, it is more likely that AQ would try to use the device to bring the US or US interests into a nuclear conflagration. So, the postings early this month on South Korean observations of AQ cells hunting for targets in ROK were intriguing. Detonation of a device in Soeul ROK or Taipei could bring about such a domino effect. Soeul would probably assume that the nuclear hit was from NorKor and retalliate with full force. The US could be drawn into such a conflict through mutual security agreements.

But, in these scenarios, US civilians are not the primary targets.

So, in the end, I remain unconvinced that an American civilian will be involved with dealing with the ramifications of the event.

In all reality, most of us have not had to deal with the effects of the 9/11 attacks directly. Most of us have had inconveniences while travelling, saw our stock portfolios decline in the year after the attacks, and may indirectly have heard of a victim or family around us; but most of us have not had direct damage from the attack.

1K-3Kton nuclear devices are not as concerning to me now.

I don't do business in urban cores anyway. So, for me, it's no problem.

For those of you who work in such places, security people can prevent these nightmare scenarios by controlling activity on the street well (no trucks on the street without explanation of business in the area).

[HitmanLV]

While I agree that the suitcase nukes are relatively small, it's not entirely fair to say that they won't have much of an impact unless a victim is relatively close.

For example, an atomic fireball would set fire to several blocks of buildings in a large city, which would mean firemen would have to tend to that out-of-control blaze before it spreads.

Also, fire would likely shoot down several subway tunnels, killing everyone in them, and as we know, fire burns upwards, and likely shoot out on to the streets from subway gratings and subway entrances.

That same fire would set off cars, people, buildings, as well as ignite dangerous gasses in the sewer system and gas lines, causing more explosions and fires around town.

There are not enough firemen to handle these out of control fires. Factor in what I would guess would be a severe power failure, and one or two suitcase nukes would make manhattan quite a hot place to be in for a while.

[JustPiper]

But with their radiological devices now employed in Manhattan and NYC etc would they not detect this suitcases quickly?