Replies

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).

GREAT FURTHER ANALYSIS. THANKS TONS.

Glad DC is not so vulnerable to tactical level nukes.

I think I agree that it's unlikely for one terror cell to have more than one nuke.

I don't have much trouble believing that there have been and are far too many failures of our Intel.

Perhaps it's more accurate to say--failures of sifting the data. But, I also think there have been and are failures in getting some key raw data.

Have long felt that containers would likely be more serious hazards in a list of ways.

A container sized nuke--even from N Korea--would be considerably more heafty than a tactical nuke, wouldn't it?

Personally, I'm amidst high desert, in a relatively small town amidst even sparser population. The nearest target worth bothering with are a couple of coal powered electric plants 15 or so miles west. Those would likely be well down a LONG list for China or Russia. I doubt Al Qaeda would bother much with them though they could. They are on the Navajo reservation and Navajos are fairly sensitive and alert about strangers on their turf.

But, I have loved ones all around the planet. Certainly have them in Soeul, Taipei and many major American cities.

And no one wants to see loss of life nor the economy crashing.

And would really find it a bummer to see WWIII triggered.

Much appreciate your kind responses.

I don't consider AlQaeda to be on it's death-bed--with or without Bin Laden dead.

BTW, how much damage to a nuclear electric plant's containment vessel would a container sized nuke do from 500-2,000 feet away?

I AGREE about distributed infrastructure etc. vs city center congregations. Resiliency is a high priority in individuals, families, communities and nations.

Getting there at this late stage, will probably not happen enough, soon enough to prepare us much at all for WWIII.

But our spiritual resources are consistently underestimated by a list of enemies.

Thanks again.

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.

Keep in mind that these low-lifes have at least a rudimentary understanding of American culture and lifestyle. At this time of the year, outside of sporting events like I posted above, they KNOW that the average American is at the mall.

I'd strongly suggest looking at the larger malls and shopping areas in each of those areas (Tyson's Corner or Potomac Mills in Washington, Paramus Park in North Jersey, Fifth Avenue/Park Avenue in Manhattan, Woodfield Mall or Michigan Avenue in Chicago). If they are looking for maximum collateral damage, those areas would be serious targets in each of those metro areas. There are other potential targets for sure, but don't forget - they are not only interested in damaging out command/control structure, but to cause maximum panic and fear among the populace as well.

One other area that would be attractive would be the airports themselves. JFK, Dulles, O'Hare, LAX (not to mention Hartsfield & DFW) will all be full of passengers, both foreign and domestic, originating, terminating and transitioning their trips in these gateway cities. A device placed within one of the terminals at any of these airports will accomplish their task just as readily and with significant loss of life as well.

Since AQ is on it's death be

This is what sticks with me, they will be desperate to prove their Daddy or DaDa is tougher than ours right now. Can you elaborate for us on the chem/bio scenario, I wondered since you left this out so far of all your scenario's?