Skip to comments.
The Implausibility of Nuclear Terrorism (idiot column of the century + triple barf alert)
Creators Syndicate ^
| 2/12/08
| Steve Chapman
Posted on 02/12/2008 12:54:31 PM PST by meandog
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
Where do they dig these fools up...not only is he's dead wrong about "radioactive scrap metal" from old warheads (Tridium leak) he's an idiot for not realizing that nuclear proliferation (at least the transfer of technical information) has probably already occurred within the Pakistani army to terrorists. It does not take too much imagination and technical expertise to produce a Hiroshima equivalent bomb that could be smuggled in on a ocean freighter to an American port and exploded.
1
posted on
02/12/2008 12:54:41 PM PST
by
meandog
To: meandog
tridium=tritium Sheeeech!
2
posted on
02/12/2008 12:59:10 PM PST
by
meandog
(Please pray for future President McCain--day minus 326 and counting! Stay home and get Hillary!)
To: meandog
More than once since he came back from the Middle East, General Franks has said he thinks it’s only a matter of time. Just identifying one dissenting view.
3
posted on
02/12/2008 12:59:16 PM PST
by
squidly
To: meandog
Chapman is a libertarian moron who takes these types of positions sometimes, I think, to stir things up. It’s hard to believe any rational American could write this drivel, but that’s what we get from the Chicago Tribune. Here’s to hoping Sam Zell will clean house and fire the entire editorial board. They are incompetent.
4
posted on
02/12/2008 12:59:43 PM PST
by
astounded
(The Democrat Party is a Clear and Present Danger to the USA)
To: meandog
.... and the entire transfer of weapons technology
from US -> Turkey -> Pakistan was directed by Xlinton
and then covered up by ......... Sandy Burger.
5
posted on
02/12/2008 1:00:27 PM PST
by
Diogenesis
(Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum)
To: meandog
From the article...
After Sept. 11, 2001, we all thought more attacks were a certainty. Yet al-Qaida and its ideological kin have proved unable to mount a second strike.I find it entertaining that so many of these folks willfully ignore the planned attacks that have been foiled post 9/11. Then again, maybe it's not so entertaining.
6
posted on
02/12/2008 1:01:18 PM PST
by
squidly
To: meandog
Yup - it is extremely foolish not to mention ignorant.
“Yet al-Qaida and its ideological kin have proved unable to mount a second strike.”
That’s because they plan attacks decades apart, allowing for time to be on the run as they have been, preparations, and waiting for us to elect a less defense oriented President.
7
posted on
02/12/2008 1:02:22 PM PST
by
rjp2005
(Lord have mercy on us)
To: meandog
This is how Liberals think.
“It won’t happen, because it can’t.”
or
“It might happen so we should make a law to prevent it.”
Those two extremes are precisely how they keep everyone out of balance.
They ought to be thinking, “It might happen, because someone can make it happen and thus we should work to prevent the bad guys from making it happen” — but not make LAWS to prevent it, rather, send the people we have doing the job out to continue to the do the job. And hiring better analysts and hanging on to the military people we have (and recruiting new ones).
8
posted on
02/12/2008 1:03:52 PM PST
by
Rick.Donaldson
(http://www.transasianaxis.com - Visit for lastest on DPRK/Russia/China/Etc --Fred Thompson for Prez.)
To: rjp2005
And 9-11 was the #2, with 1993 being the #1.
9
posted on
02/12/2008 1:03:52 PM PST
by
rjp2005
(Lord have mercy on us)
To: astounded
Chapman is a libertarian moron You're half right.
L
10
posted on
02/12/2008 1:04:34 PM PST
by
Lurker
(Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
To: Lurker
But that means I’m half wrong. I believe he professed to be a libertarian in print once upon a time, so I don’t think that’s the half-wrong. However, his writings clearly demonstrate he’s a moron, so I’m stuck. Any help would be appreciated in resolving this quandary...
11
posted on
02/12/2008 1:08:27 PM PST
by
astounded
(The Democrat Party is a Clear and Present Danger to the USA)
To: meandog
As I have posted before, editors also need to ensure that columnists and reporters don’t publish articles that tend to embarass the authors or the organization.
The editor failed to protect the franchise. This is a college newspaper level column. Embarassing.
12
posted on
02/12/2008 1:11:17 PM PST
by
TexanToTheCore
(If it ain't Rugby or Bullriding, it's for girls.........................................)
To: astounded
I believe he professed to be a libertarian in print once upon a time Bill Maher professed the same thing. Well he can call himself a libertarian the same way he can call himself a Guernsey cow.
That doesn't mean you can milk him.
Chapman couldn't articulate a Libertarian principle if you pointed a Chicago banned handgun at him. (Something he's totally in favor of btw. Not exactly a Libertarian position, that.)
L
13
posted on
02/12/2008 1:14:56 PM PST
by
Lurker
(Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
To: meandog
Will read this later. Thanks.
To: astounded
Not only is he a liberal moron; he did little fact checking with the technical community who would know a thing or two about the plausibility of terrorists building nukes...it’s rather simple with the right ingredients; besides those old “radioactive scrap metal” that he arrogantly discards can make quite a dirty bomb—just as effective as the real thing over time as you don’t really need the big boom neutron effect, just the ability to poison water sources (reservoirs, aquifers, etc.) with alpha particles and pollute the rest of the environment with the beta gamma. The resulting rising rates of cancers will be alarming and overwhelm the targeted locality's (the size of the San Francisco-Oakland area) healthcare facilities.
15
posted on
02/12/2008 1:17:08 PM PST
by
meandog
(Please pray for future President McCain--day minus 326 and counting! Stay home and get Hillary!)
To: meandog
"But remember: After Sept. 11, 2001, we all thought more attacks were a certainty. Yet al-Qaida and its ideological kin have proved unable to mount a second strike."And for that we give our gratitude to George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Don Rumsfield and our eternal gratitude to the men and women of the armed forces of the United States.
16
posted on
02/12/2008 1:19:48 PM PST
by
norwaypinesavage
(Planting trees to offset carbon emissions is like drinking water to offset rising ocean levels)
To: meandog
---
None of this means we should stop trying to minimize the risk by securing nuclear stockpiles, monitoring terrorist communications and improving port screening. But it offers good reason to think that in this war, it appears, the worst eventuality is one that will never happen.----last paragraph--
17
posted on
02/12/2008 1:20:20 PM PST
by
rellimpank
(--don't believe anything the MSM tells you about firearms or explosives--NRA Benefactor)
To: meandog
We have been under threat of imminent global nuclear annihilation since 1957. It’s too much to ask us to get excited over a handful of nukes going off here and there.
18
posted on
02/12/2008 1:23:52 PM PST
by
RightWhale
(Clam down! avoid ataque de nervosa)
To: RightWhale
As long as we know where to send our nuclear reprisal, you are right.
Stateless nukes don’t have a return address, so we’ll just have to settle for destroying the Ummah. All of it.
To: meandog
Even a fizzle yield with a simple device fueled with U235 could kill thousands. They don’t need to make complex implosion weapon with Plutonium.
20
posted on
02/12/2008 1:32:41 PM PST
by
jesseam
(Been there and done that!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson