Just fyi, your first link takes me to the beginning of this thread, and the second link takes me to "this document does not exist etc".
I am reading with interest this debate (and others like it) and since I am an unlettered ignoramous and know nothing about physics, chemistry, or nuclear bomb manufacture, I have no informed opinion about either side. I can only try to gauge attitudes or motives, guided by simple mother wit.
Could you explain in simple laymans' language, whether you think it impossible or not for AQ or some version of it to nuke us with some kind of nukes either in the CONUS or soon to be here? Since others on these threads say it is impossible for various reasons, I'd like to hear your opinion. If you don't mind.
I'll try and answer your questions:
I believe that it is possible to construct an improvised nuclear device if you can get a few key ingredients, specifically, the plutonium 'pit' and some kind of ignition device (think of it as a spark plug). Most of the debate has been about whether or not these two particular things could be managed 'in the field'. I say the obstacles are surmountable, my several opponents say they are not. In spite of the claims of one of them that I 'obviously know nothing' about nuclear physics, I am qualified to have an opinion.
The basic premise, that you can construct a nuclear weapon from plutonium and an appropriate initiator (beryllium/polonium being what was used in the 'Fat Man' bomb in WWII, proven 60 year old technology) and that all the rest can be fabricated or discarded, has not been refuted. I say, thank God that plutonium is so hard to get. Although I don't think it would be hard to transport the necessary ingredients across the border, I think it is unlikely that the plutonium, at least, could go missing without being noticed. As stated in an earlier post, I think a biological or chemical attack more likely.