Posted on 09/28/2001 12:44:29 PM PDT by smolensk
WASHINGTON — More than 100 terrorist organizations around the world have succeeded in obtaining elements for the construction of a nuclear bomb.
A United Nations report said the organizations have obtained the material from nuclear reactors in the former Soviet Union. The report said the terrorist groups have been leading clients of traffickers in smuggled nuclear goods.
The report recorded 550 incidents of nuclear trafficking since 1993.
As a result, the UN said, more than 100 terrorist groups are now capable of developing an atomic bomb. The report, first disclosed by the London-based Guardian daily, said worldwide smuggling of radioactive materials has doubled since 1996, Middle East Newsline reported.
The nuclear trafficking increased dramatically since the collapse of the former Soviet Union. Many of these incidents were not confirmed.
Western intelligence sources said the terrorist groups are led by the Al Qaeda group of Saudi billionaire fugitive Osama Bin Laden. The sources said Bin Laden is believed to have at least two nuclear bombs.
Last week, the UN held a conference in Stockholm on nuclear trafficking. The International Atomic Energy Agency urged the international community to strengthen regulations to prevent nuclear smuggling and trafficking.
The IAEA has recorded more than 370 confirmed incidents of nuclear trafficking since 1993. The agency said most of the incidents do not involve material that can be used for the assembly of nuclear weapons.
"Looking toward the future, it is clear that broad international cooperation will be needed to upgrade security measures, to improve capabilities for intercepting and responding to illicit trafficking, and to enhance the protection of facilities against terrorism and sabotage." IAEA director-general Mohamed El Baradei said.
"The most difficult challenge will be the effective consolidation of all these measures into integrated, efficient national systems, ensuring that the security of nuclear and other radioactive material is woven into the infrastructure of nuclear safety and security."
So in your mind TV pictures of collateral damage in Afghanistan by the United States would be justification for use of nuclear weapons by Bin Laden. Interesting. Would you mind telling us what would justify use of nuclear weapons by the United States? I believe I recently observed some collateral damage in New York.
Just like the "woo woo" reports of police finding "bomb-making materials" in someone's house (translation: Black Powder or many other household items), this sounds blown out of proportion: "elements for the construction of a nuclear bomb" could include transistors, conventional explosives, lead shielding, etc.
As a result, the UN said, more than 100 terrorist groups are now capable of developing an atomic bomb.
Hell, *I'm* "capable of developing an atomic bomb". Acquiring all the high-tech materials and components, on the other hand...
The agency said most of the incidents do not involve material that can be used for the assembly of nuclear weapons.
Bingo.
There's a big difference between unspecified "nuclear materials" and "the large amounts of highly purified Plutonium or U-235 necessary to make an atomic bomb".
That said, given that they're trying so hard to acquire the necessary materials for a working nuke, what proactive measures are we taking to protect Americans?
Headline writers need to shape up. They've been getting real sloppy lately.
Sorry, uh uh, don't buy it. These terrorists are notorious for blowing themselves up trying to put bombs together.
ABOLUTELY NOT!!! But I do think that in Bin Laden's mind he would believe it would be enough for him to appear justified by the Muslim world. Clearly Sadam would support him, and it might even tip some of the others like, syria, Libya and the Sudan.
All radioactive elements decay over time. Some faster than others.
Unfortunately for your hope however, the half-life of Uranium-235 is 713 million years, and the half-life of Plutonium-239 is 24,110 years.
So don't expect caches of either one to degrade noticeably over our lifetimes, or even your great-great-great-grandchildren's lifetimes.
What *does* decay quickly is Tritium, which has a half-life of only 12 years. This is why "baby nukes", which are salted with Tritium in a way that allows them to go "boom" even with what would otherwise be sub-critical amounts of U-235 or P-239, must be periodically "refreshed" every few years or else they'll fizzle when you eventually detonate them. So "suitcase nukes" have a limited shelf life.
But a a good old fashioned A-bomb like the types dropped on Hiroshima (15 kilotons) or Nagasaki (20 kilotons) will stay "fresh" for hundreds of years, and is far easier to manufacture (given the materials) than a "suitcase nuke". Baby nukes and really big nukes are more high-tech than the middle-of-the-road ones (10kt-50kt).
And none of them have tested one to make sure a) they work, and b) they know how to operate them?
Nuclear weapons have shelf-lives. Components must be replaced and refreshed every several years.
More or less correct, but I would dispute the "100's of years" figure. However, these would be inordinately large, cumbersome weapons for primitives in Afghanistan -- or even Iraq or Iran -- to manufacture. They would be much more interested in the smaller, more portable devices, and especially in devices not requiring so much fissible material! That stuff is hard to come by!
So if he's got the Suitcase Nukes, they are likely to be useless or nearly so, and I doubt he's got the fissible material for the bigger brethren.
If I had a guess, I'd say he'd extract plutonium and use it as a poison. Spread it around in America some where. Something like that.
Stop trying to cheer us up, Laz! :-) As I'm sure you know, when the Manhattan Project was barely underway and coming across tremendous difficulties (weight, not enough U235, etc.), some of the scientists suggested spreading strontium-90 in Germany's water supply instead of building an actual bomb. Would have been a lot of dead Germans...
Who's next?
Egypt's gonna get one too, just to use on you know who. So Israel's getting tense, wants one in self defense
The Lord's our shepherd, says the Psalm But just in case, we better get A BOMB!!!
I graduated from college in 1972. There were Iranians in my physics department who went on to get Phd's in nuclear subjects. The "cat has been out of the bag" for many years.
Bingo. There's a big difference between unspecified "nuclear materials" and "the large amounts of highly purified Plutonium or U-235 necessary to make an atomic bomb".Yep, but there is at least one country that we know has nukes that is a few small steps away from total chaos. What happens if a civil war ends with the wrong people in charge?
I'm not worried about that: There's plenty of nasty things that terrorists could disperse from crop dusters that can't be detected at the border with Geiger counters. The bodycount payoff from plutonium would be much too low compared to the difficulty in smuggling the material in.
The most effective thing I can see for a terrorist group to do with bomb-grade Pu or U is to sell it to a government, in return for conventional arms and logistical support. I expect most of any fissionable material missing from the former Soviet Union is "safely" in the hands of the Pakistani (or, less likely, Iraqi) government.
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.