[bayourod]

When you hear someone mention the danger of a nuclear weapon being driven across the border what does your mind envision? A Hummer traversing an isolated part of the desert at night or an eighteen wheeler crossing the international bridge at El Paso?

An atomic weapon would weigh several tons and would be extremely difficult to smuggle from Syria or Estonia to El Paso.

Our government has concentrated on stopping the smuggling of a nuclear bomb at its source, at ports in Europe, Asia, Africa and the Middle East; at ports in South and Central America; at the Southern border of Mexico and finally at our own border. We even board ships headed toward Mexican ports.

At most official crossing points we have installed x-ray equipment and equipment that can detect nuclear particles. To protect our border between official crossing points we have areal surveillance (manned, unmanned and satellite) and ground sensors.

But most of the people complaining about nukes crossing the Mexican border really aren't concerned about nukes, they really just want to keep Mexican laborers from crossing. But the way you prevent nukes from reaching the U.S. is different than the way you stop Mexican laborers.

The fact that millions of Mexican laborers can climb over mountains, swim rivers, and trek across desserts does not mean that an eighteen wheeler can get across unnoticed.

The biggest threat of a nuclear weapon crossing the southern border is corrupt border guards. I've heard that corruption is very common regarding drug smuggling and human smuggling, but I would hope no set of guards would conspire to allow a nuke to pass through.

[nathanbedford]

You are correct the greatest threat is from corrupt border guards. As I posted many months ago when a poster suggested that a scenario involving the transport of a nuke across the Mexican border, I created in minutes a scenario involving corrupt guards passing what they thought was drugs.

In any event, the device (or devices, given these terrorists' penchant for multiple strikes) need not cross over whole but rather in manageable pieces to be assembled here. According to Newt Gingrich, the director of the CIA takes this threat as gravely serious. One can only speculate on the fall out (poor pun intended) against this administration if, after tens of thousands died in an atomic blast, it was revealed that the administration ignored warnings from its own intelligence chief for partisan political gain.

It is necessary to stop the weapons at foreign ports before they get here because that would be too late if, for example, one detonated in the port of New York. This is all as you have pointed out. But the difficulty is in the number of ports, the millions of containers, and the expense and paucity of the detection equipment. Then one must contend with the possibility of a transfer at sea after the inspection.
Finally, every impediment to the proper defense of our border advanced by you would have absolutely nothing to do with the transport of biological weapons of mass destruction contained in a mason jar, hidden under a serape.

Do all these difficulties mean that we should throw up our hands and give up the daunting effort of stopping ships with nukes at their ports of debarkation? Of course not. Nor should we ignore the threat to our southern border by unrestrained, illegal migration. The question is not whether it is hard but whether our national survival depends upon it. Our national survival as a functioning democracy with a sustaining economy is certainly at stake in the wake of an atomic or biological strike, depend upon it.

[primeval patriot]

Bayoufraud is back.

[azhenfud]

"An atomic weapon would weigh several tons and would be extremely difficult to smuggle from Syria or Estonia to El Paso."

Apparently you don't recall the 280 mikemike atomic cannon. The 15kt projectiles were indeed, capable of critical nuclear detonation and weighed a little over 500lbs.

[The Toll]

Your tagline about Hillary and my guns reveals a very serious misunderstanding of this country and the poeple who live in it.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

RE: An atomic weapon would weigh several tons and would be extremely difficult to smuggle from Syria or Estonia to El Paso.

A HE projectile for a 155 howitzer weighs about 95 pounds if I remember correctly. As far back as the 1970s 155 howitzers had atomic projectiles, I believe. A quick search found info about the W48 155-millimeter howitzer atomic projectile. Yes, I know that tactical weapons are not city busters. But just one tactical nuke could ruin your day nevertheless.

RE: "[most people] just want to keep Mexican laborers from crossing"

No matter how many times we say ILLEGAL ILLEGAL ILLEGAL ILLEGAL ILLEGAL it always goes over your head. Another way of stating your comment is the correct way, "Most people just want to keep ILLEGAL immigrants from crossing."

Why is that so difficult to understand?

IMO, "cheap" legal immigrant labor is another debate best left until ILLEGAL ILLEGAL ILLEGAL ILLEGAL ILLEGAL immigration is ended (at least as best we can).

BTW, great debate so far.

[nathanbedford]

I would be interested in your reaction to the Meet The Press Roundtable on point to this very issue, if you haver seen it, of course.