Replies

I can help you out a bit here..maybe not as much as some ‘in the know”,though..Perhaps someone who knows more than I do--can "add to" this discussion or such. it IS true...that an average “suitcase nuke” would need some “tuning up” to make it work. not so much for the actual nuclear fuel, but for the “other things” needed to make it work.

First off...consider what the “suitcase nuke”, as it is called...was designed for in the FIRST place...to be smuggled onto a major military base or perhaps government complex, hidden and “left there” by covert operatives...and take out that complex. They were NEVER intended to be used against “soft targets” such as cities or civilian populations—as far as I have been able to determine. ALSO..WE(the US), DID have a type of “suitcase nuke OURSELVES. The smaller types were called SADM'S(Small atomic demolition munition) and the Larger types were called “MADM'S (medium atomic demolition munition) They were typically housed in a “large backpack” type of carrier—and in the case of the MADM—the yield could go as high as 10KT—using the W-45 warhead.(Not far from the Hiroshima yield). Now—these WERE pretty heavy, and typically meant to be handled by more than one person. IOW—the “Peacemaker” scenario—with that little “thermos sized” nuke, in a small backpack—was NOT true....or at least admitted to in public domain.

However—ALL nukes, in particular a small sized one with more than 1KT yield...MUST be “enriched”, or “boosted” so that the chain reaction will take place fast enough—and efficiently enough—to produce a boom and not a “fizzile”—where not enough nuclear mass is reacted on—and you end up with a “Dirty bomb”. Usually—tritium is needed to produce this boosting effect...and it HAS to be replaced every so often-—in our normal warheads in service—every few years. Otherwise..it will NOT boost—and the bomb will NOT “blow”. Also—to start the chain reaction—one needs a stream of neutrons to be injected into the core at EXACTLY the right time—as the mass is brought to criticality...One again..no neutron bombardment...no BOOM..and only “dirt”. These neutron generators ALSO have to be replaced on a regular basis.

BTW—ALL of this is “public knowledge”. I am NOT “revealing anything” here. ANYONE can look up everything I know themselves.

SO—it is NOT too easy, to take an old, forgotten miniature nuke, that has been “dormant” for probably at least 20 years...and just “fire it off”. Now—it is NOT impossible...but NOT too probable either. But does that mean that we shouldn't worry? of course not!! Not too mention—how do we know, that some warhead off of a “decommissioned” Russian missile has not “found its way” into the hands of terrorists?? Some of them could ALSO be transported in a small car—or ANY plane.

As for a “dirty bomb” incident...using a “fiziled nuke” would NOT be the most effective method to do this. There is not enough mass—to produce a very large radioactive cloud. Sure—in the immediate area—say—a few blocks—there WOULD be a BIG problem,, and the need for decon procedures, clean--up, etc.. but NOT like there would be if, for example a BUNCH of low—level radioactive waste, say a couple of tons—were dispersed into a cloud by a large amount of explosives. THAT could produce a big fallout cloud, over a metropolitan area. But STILL—NO “dirty bomb” is going to “wipe out” a city or such. Detonated in a complex, on the other hand—like the UN or such—there WOULD be a HUGE problem, of course.

AS I said before...There IS a threat--and we should let it be known that we WILL respond to such an incident...by converting several miles radius of terrorist areas to smoldering ashes. But I suspect that Obama would get all "wee--weed up" and talk abut how we "must understand the frustrations of our enemies" or other such crap.