Posted on 07/06/2007 4:23:33 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Attack likely to exploit existing network of cross-border human, drug traffickers.
A nuclear terrorist attack on the U.S. is better than an even bet in the next 10 years, says a former assistant secretary of defense and author of a book on the subject.
"Based on current trends, a nuclear terrorist attack on the United States is more likely than not in the decade ahead," says Graham Allison, director of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government and author of "Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable Catastrophe."
Allison, who has testified before Congress on the subject, says the illicit economy for narcotics and illegal alien trafficking "has built up a vast infrastructure that terrorists could exploit" in delivering a nuclear weapon to its target in the U.S.
Al-Qaida, which has threatened to launch an "American Hiroshima" attack on the U.S., remains Allison's No. 1 suspect to pull off such a mission.
"Former CIA Director George J. Tenet wrote in his memoirs that al-Qaida's leadership has remained 'singularly focused on acquiring WMD' – weapons of mass destruction – and willing to 'pay whatever it would cost to get their hands on fissile material,'" Allison wrote in an opinion piece appearing in the Baltimore Sun prior to Independence Day.
Allison says there are several viable options open to terrorists determined to secure nuclear weapons.
"They could acquire an existing bomb from one of the nuclear weapons states or construct an elementary nuclear device from highly enriched uranium made by a state," he wrote. "Theft of a warhead or material would not be easy, but attempted thefts in Russia and elsewhere are not uncommon."
Allison says terrorists are capable of building their own nuclear weapons if they can simply secure the fissile material.
"Once a terrorist group acquires about 100 pounds of highly enriched uranium, it could conceivably use publicly available documents and items commercially obtainable in any technologically advanced country to construct a bomb such as the one dropped on Hiroshima," he states.
The threat is imminent, says Allison.
"If terrorists bought or stole a nuclear weapon in good working condition, they could explode it today," he explains. "If the weapon had a lock, detonation would be delayed for several days. If terrorists acquired 100 pounds of highly enriched uranium, they could have a working elementary nuclear bomb in less than a year."
WND first broke the story of Osama bin Laden's plans for a nuclear terrorist attack on multiple cities in the U.S.
President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and the 9/11 commission have all concluded a nuclear terrorist attack is not only the nation's No. 1 nightmare but also something of an inevitability at some time in the future.
Earlier this year, WND reported how the most extensive study of the effects of nuclear detonations in four major U.S. cities paints a grim picture of millions of deaths, overwhelmed hospitals and loss of command-and-control capability by government.
But the three-year study by researchers at the Center for Mass Destruction Defense at the University of Georgia says a concerted effort to teach civilians what to do in the event of a nuclear attack is the best – perhaps only – thing that could save an untold number of lives that will otherwise be needlessly lost.
"If a nuclear detonation were to occur in a downtown area, the picture would be bleak there," said Cham Dallas, director of the program and professor in the college of pharmacy. "But in urban areas farther from the detonation, there actually is quite a bit that we can do. In certain areas, it may be possible to turn the death rate from 90 percent in some burn populations to probably 20 or 30 percent – and those are very big differences – simply by being prepared well in advance."
As well ....I just suggested SD as it was real close to the border ...........I wouldn’t want to be a muslim within rifle range if such is set upon our nation.
The good islamakazis better get a grip on the bad islamakazis NOW because they will not like a patriots post attack ad hoc instant and permanent solution of a problem they could have stepped up too and taken care of beforehand !
Those that need to know. It can be a fairly small set of people. Diplomats deal in secrets all the time. Those who are ordered to carefully monitor Islamic extremists don't have to know the why behind the diligent monitoring. Why does the government have to tell the American people anything about the policy? Who really expects our government to detail its strategic plans?
Since we have taken down those two state sponsors of terrorism, all attacks have stopped--not.
You missed my point. George W. Bush has credibility threatening disproportionate responses because he has already responded in a disproportionate fashion. Is any policy going to end all terrorist acts? No but the policy here is to limit catastrophic terrorist acts.
“OTOH, if it’s smuggled in by sea, they’ll probably use it right there in that port city, again to reduce the chance of intercept en route to an interior city. Seattle, Long Beach/LA, NY, etc.”
Combined Long Beach/Lost Angeles harbors equals the US’s largest volume seaport. (It is technically two jurisdictions)
Immediately after 9/11/2001 there were often 20+ ships waiting outside the harbor, in que.
These days there is seldom a que, because apparently there is a more effective procedure and clearance schedule.
But the methodology involved spot checking, not 100% inspections.
Please correct this, if it is wrong. But the point is it would seem relatively simple to get material into a harbor.
I'm going to suggest that "my" spot on the map, Hanford, WA, would be a waste of a perfectly good warhead at this point. Plutonium production ended decades ago, few people, just a wasteland anyway.
The problem the Pentagon had is the Commander in Chief immediately says Islam is a religion of peace. That stupid statement set the military back at least 4 years in addressing the problem. - Tom
If this does happen Mecca should become a pile of glass. And for kicks just blow up the Dome of the Rockl
Under President Bob Mecca would have been a pile of glass approximately 9/18/2001.
But what about the “outrage” the “overreaction”, the “backlash”.
President Bob would calmly explain that any anger at America is misdirected, the reason Mecca no longer exists is because of Islamic Fundamentalists. The destruction of Mecca is proof positive that terrorism is not what Allah wants, Islamic radicals caused the destruction of Mecca, as well as those other couple of thousand mosques we destroyed on 9/18.
Just as 9/11 was a wake-up call for America 9/18 was the wake up call for Muslims, if you would like to embrace a radical, stone age interpretation of your religion we will accomadate you on the stone age part of the equation. Hopefully 9/18 is the cold slap of reality on the face of followers of Islam that allah and Islam are not destined to control the world.
Any further terrorist attacks in the name of Islam will result in more massive deaths in the Muslim community and thousands of more mosques and communities turned into rubble until the lunacy of the radicals is brought under control.
It is now incumbent for the followers of Islam to get their house in order as America will no longer tolerate them like the parent of a spoiled child. We have ourselves to blame for tolerating this bad behaviour for so long, the warning signs were there, the threats were made, many were killed. Our non-reaction to many of these events gave radicals a feeling that they were invincible, they were on the right side of the argument, their God was going to rule the day.
That all ended on 9/18/2001, America accepts no blame for her reaction and for the deaths of 5 million muslims on 9/18, that blame lies with the muslim community. We are sorry that there were some innocents lost in the 5 million, this is a casualty of war, on 9/11 100% of the victims were innocent by design. You don’t tug on Superman’s cape.
This is President Bob saying God Bless You and God Bless America!!
I forgot to mention that on 9/18/2001 there would have been a “new” country called AF-GONE-ISTAN.
The original point of discussion was whether the US government should threaten Islamic countries that if any nuclear weapon were to be detonated in the US, we would announce that "Mecca and all Islamic Holy sites and US Mosques easily within reach will be razed should any Atomic weapon be unleashed...no negotiations, no compromises. You just announce that it doesn’t matter regarding which group might have been responsible...you hold the RELIGIOUS IDEOLOGY responsible for the destruction and act accordingly!"
We can tell the governments of Islamic countries, in secret, that is our policy, but if the attack occurs, we must then inform the American public that this is our policy, i.e., we are declaring war on the world's one billion Muslims, including the 2 to 4 million Muslims in the US. It is an insane policy and I doubt that the American people would support such a policy even if we had been attacked with a nuclear weapon by an Islamic terrorist group, i.e., AQ. And it is also worth remembering that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan has nuclear weapons. You can have strategic plans, but they had better be supportable by the American people and Congress.
You missed my point. George W. Bush has credibility threatening disproportionate responses because he has already responded in a disproportionate fashion. Is any policy going to end all terrorist acts? No but the policy here is to limit catastrophic terrorist acts.
Bush's credibility is fast evaporating as the axis of evil minus Iraq has been thumbing its nose at us. North Korea has tested or tried to test a nuclear weapon despite repeated threats by us. Iran is ignoring our threats and proceeding with its nuclear program. Iran is also training Iraqi terrorists, providing them with weapons to kill Americans, and sending in Iranian advisers to help the enemy. Bush has said that we will not allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons. Is that just an empty threat? The Iranians seem to think so.
I’d guess Seattle or Long Beach / LA, in a shipping container, set to go off upon reaching port. Just put a GPS detonator on it, to go off upon crossing the X longitude (in port).
:^0
My last comment was mostly for you.
San Diego is the home port to the 2nd biggest naval fleet on the planet. Several CVN flat tops are in port on an average day, plus everything else you can imagine. So if China was going to be tricky, they could do it, and leave a jihad back trail for false attribution.
Set that sucker off in a stack of ten thousand containers, and you would have a HUGE economic hit. You could send 20 such bombs in containers to a dozen US ports, and if even one went off, all of the other port ops would halt for weeks while the other bombs were searched out. Set the detonators on both GPS coords and time delays. That is, they will go off when passing east of a longitude, OR after a certain time and date, which either one comes first. The giant Super Panamax container ships are huge targets in themselves, so whether the bombs go off at sea, in port, or on a RR train crossing a bridge, the consequences would be incalculable. And that is non-nuke. A terrorist state could pull it off, packing explosives into containers full of innocuous cargo. Just a thought.
I agree completely, especially if the Democrats are in full control of the government when such an attack occurs. There once were Democrats who understood the importance of national security. They no longer exist, ANYwhere. Even Joe Lieberman came to realize that.
My prediction: if such an attack DOES happen, and our "spineless political heroes" seem unable to respond (or respond inadequately), it will precipitate a military takeover of the government by those who actually do have enough "b@lls" to at least try to fight back.
A latter day "Seven Days In May", if you will.
And I also predict that if things ever get that bad, a large percentage of Americans will WELCOME such a takeover (yes, I mean that). They - like I - will realize it may be the only chance left to rid ourselves of liberalism and to engage Islam in the struggle that Islam itself desires: a fight to the finish for Western Civilization.
- John
Sadly, I must agree with you.
If a nuke went off in NY, I don’t think we would respond with nukes.
And, I think the liberals would, once again, blame America and Fred Thompson’s administration.
We can’t afford to ignore any scenario.....from the nuke to the cross country road trip with a simple bic lighter.
For the nuclear option, yours is the most viable IMO......
But who knows they get more mileage out of false threats than action these days with the US fighting men and women stalking their sorry asses ......
Keep em running till hells freezes over I say.......like the vermin they are.
Wrong question.
How many and which US cities will be destroyed?
I prefer to do my sleep losing before something happens, when it might do some good.
Except for the Paki intelligence apparatus, they are trying to figure out how to see that the nut jobs *do* get one or more little presents.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.