[Mount Athos]

uh sorry about formatting, auto-edit dumped it all into a single paragraph.

[BenLurkin]

Imagine a relatively small nuclear bomb of 10 kilotons exploding in San Francisco's Union Square.

[jocon307]

So what, San Fran voted Kerry, they must love Muslim Terrorists, and I'm sure the terrorists love them back and would never bomb them.

[FormerACLUmember]

All this is very ironic, since

1) the scenerio is highly plausible

2) San Francisco is most democrat party infested, anti-American, pro-IslamoFascist place in America.

[baltodog]

While I take the threat of a nuclear yeild seriously, I suspect that the parameters needed to effect an explosive yeild would be too difficult master.

I have always been under the impression that so many things must be "just right" for there to be a blast.

Yes? No?

[Dallas59]

San Fransisco is probably the safest place to be. Alot of AQ supporters there.

[McGavin999]

To be honest with you, I don't think they are going to strike a US city with a nuclear device. I think they will try to take out a european city.

[ProtectOurFreedom]

Likeliest terrorist targets have to be NYC and Washington, DC. NYC to destroy capitalism (banking, equity markets) and Washington (decapitate democracy). From a strategic value perspective, SF would be low on their list.

[GeronL]

I love that scenario.... I am so liking that scenario... brings a tear to my eye just thinking about it

[Anti-Christ is Hillary]

Another book to read is "Osamas Revenge: THE NEXT 9/11 : What the Media and the Government Haven't Told You." By Paul Willams. If I remember right Mr. Williams is ex-C.I.A.

He chronicles in his book that Osama wants to detonate 7 nukes simultaneously in different cities across America. San Francisco, LA, Chicago, New York, Washington D.C., Houston and I think Seattle. He also thinks that they are planning to strike before the end of 2005.

[LibWhacker]

What if they gave a nuclear war and liberals were vaporized?

[nathanbedford]

Alarm over the prospect of a city being devastated by a terrorist nuclear bomb was sounded soon after Sept. 11, but has grown noticeably louder in recent weeks and months

It has become fashionable on these FR threads to trivialize or satirize these ominous warnings when they have appeared lately. This may be legitimate as a reaction to a new wave of leftist alarmism running in coordination with the publication of Imperial Hubris and the wide exposure given its author who echoes these warnings. Or, and I hope this is not the case, it might just be that the supporters of Israel somehow connect these scenarios with a possible abandonment of Israel and thus must dismiss the whole discussion. See, Uncertain Trumpet: Imperial Hubris is an alarming book. National Review ^ | Sept. 27, 2004 | David Frum, http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1281603/posts

Those of us who have been posting these concerns for over a year about the possibility of a WMD strike want the danger evaluated on its own merits without reference to collateral political issues.

The whole of our democracy, our economic life and our culture are at stake.

[Nick Danger]

This is what I get for living 6 blocks from the White House.

[AnimalLover]

Bump

[rang1995]

no worry it's a BLUE city in a BLUE state
OBL

[maestro]

They would nuke D.C. and 'certain' areas of N.Y. city first,.....then many 'other' (Salt Lake) cities,....all with a view to MAKE San Francisco and Toronto, Canada....their New Capitols...

/sarcasm