What the White House is Really Worried About – Nuclear Blackmail

http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil ^ | Monday, August 26, 2002 | FoxPro

[FoxPro]

I haven’t heard this stated anywhere, but after reading several editorials, and the statement by Condoleezza Rice, something to the effect “We don’t want to witness a smoking gun where the smoke is a mushroom cloud”, it dawned on me what Western powers are really terrified of, losing power.

The Assumptions:
1. Saddam Hussein possesses a few small nuclear devices.
2. He has the ability to secretly transport these devices to the United States.

What he wont do:
He wouldn’t actually detonate these devices in a large metropolitan area. This would be suicide on his part. If he did, there would be massive retaliation, and probably the destruction of Iraq and most of its people. This serves no purpose. Its called MAD, mutually assured destruction. It is what has provided relative world peace for the last 50 years.

The Scenario:
Agents of Hussein would take one of these devices and detonate it in some remote location in the US, such as a desert in Nevada or an eastern location in Montana. Theoretically this could be done without killing anyone, with a timing device or some other methodology.

After this, Hussein would appear in the media and credibly claim that he has hidden several of these devices in secret locations in New York, Washington, Chicago and Los Angeles. He would also state that any attack on his country would lead to massive destruction of these cities, immediately.

At this point Hussein has become a major nuclear player, without having the ability to deliver nuclear weapons the more expensive and conventional way.

Then the bargaining and blackmail begins. Hussein has assured his survival, and enhanced his global power, with little expense or effort.

This, I believe, is what the Western powers are really concerned about.

[okie01]

"You fatal error is in assuming that a MAD posture will work with an extreme sociopath like Saddam..."

MAD doctrine is demonstrably ineffective against a.) madmen and b.) martyrs.

Thus, the Bush doctrine of preemption...

[Scott from the Left Coast]

This is an old concept that dates from WWII, when many argued that we should drop the A-bomb on top of Mt. Fuji instead of on a city, in order to demonstrate to the Japanese that they were powerless against us.

I think it is fatally flawed in the current situation for two reasons, one practical, one theoretical.

The practical problem: From the moment these devices get near the coast of the country they are subject to capture by the "enemy" (us). There are many points that radiation from such a device could be detected -- everything would have to go just right and no accidental discovery could occur throughout the complex process of importing and placing these devices. This is one of many reasons why no one risks their nuclear weapons in this manner -- the worst possible outcome is to have your ultimate weapon captured 10,000 miles from territory you control.

The theoretical: Even if an enemy nuclear device were exploded in such a manner as no one was killed by the blast, there would be significant environmental damage -- and merely the gaul of setting off such a device on our territory would be enough to result in a massive nuclear strike against Iraq. There is no way to do this in which there would not be an overwhelming response. Hell, we'd probably nuke Iraq if they even thought about such a thing.

[Cachelot]

Just out of curiosity, has anyone actually seen the Palermo Senator lately

Not that I know of. Heard nothing about it offloading cargo, nor of it going to the two destinations it actually had: Norfolk and Savannah. And someone sent me an url belonging to the shipowners which was supposed to be giving current info on the ship's whereabouts - the day after the "tile" statement, it didn't work anymore.

[Our man in washington]

A rational government would respond to the "desert scenario" as follows:

1. Evacuate the cities.
2. Profile all middle-eastern looking people during evacuation.
3. Obliterate Iraq.

The great thing about evacuation is that who is that John Q. American probably has relatives in West Virginia (or some other rural area) where he can stay for a few days. Abdul Muhammad probably doesn't. The terrorists would be wandering up and down I 81 looking wondering where to go and what to do. Half decent law enforcement agents should be able to catch them.

I'm assuming a government that behaved rationally, of course. No telling what this government would do.

(Of course, if Bush ever did call for evacuation, Daschle would be decrying it as a partisan move solely intended to get votes. Conservatives would notice Daschle was making such remarks while huddled in some cave west of Mud Butte, South Dakota. We would call him on his hypocrisy. He would call us "mean spirited" which is Democratese for "You're right, now shut up!" And so goeth political discourse in America.)

[mewzilla]

Thanks for the info. Think I'll have another glass of port.

[FoxPro]

Good points. I was just setting a scenario where Iraq would garner a MAD equilibrium. Of course there could many different scenarios on this.

[dark_lord]

Ya'll are missing the truely cunning approach. Which is, assuming he has more than 1 working nuke, he:

1. Gets it smuggled into the US.
2. Calls up the White house and has a quiet discussion with the appropriate person, tells them where it is.
3. HEAT goes and finds it.
4. Yep, its a live nuke. Confiscate it.
5. Saddam calls back, asks - You find it yet?
6. Yes, he is told, found it.
7. Saddam says - more where that came from. They are dispersed. You invade, kill me, they get smuggled in and detonated. Now you know I have them. Leave me alone.

Bush team backs off, says lets go with weapons inspections. Because, by that strategy, Saddam shows that:
(a) He is sane enough not to preemptively strike when he has the chance.
(b) He deters any attack on him.
(c) By handling it real quiet he gives Bush a way to quietly back down.
(d) This plan would mean we don't get nuked unless we attack him first. So he uses MAD against us!

Scary, huh?

[FoxPro]

Now there you go, we have a pitch for a movie script here. I like your deduction.

[mhking]

After this, Hussein would appear in the media and credibly claim that he has hidden several of these devices in secret locations in New York, Washington, Chicago and Los Angeles. He would also state that any attack on his country would lead to massive destruction of these cities, immediately.

Talk about emptying those cities out... You haven't seen an exodus like you would at that point.

[mhking]

The only spot in Nevada where he'd set anything off is Las Vegas. When he's ready, he's gonna light two or three or four at once, hoping beyond hope that we'd be too busy dealing with the ensuing mess and panic here to turn the entire nation of Iraq into glazed stain glass instantly.

[biffalobull]

Would anyone call his bluff?

I think if anyone did, it would be curtains for this planet. I also think if we strike first, he knows it is over and will take millions of Americans with him.

[Mr. Jeeves]

And who's to say he doesn't have nukes positioned already? That's the scary thought.

I think his weapons are in position - not nuclear bombs but weaponized anthrax. On command, an Iraqi janitor in every major city could take a couple pounds of the stuff in a soap container to the roof of a skyscraper and fling it over the side, killing 100,000 or more people. I think that was the point of last year's post 9/11 attacks - a warning that there was more to come.

[Alas Babylon!]

From the letters: WE HAVE THIS ANTHRAX.......

[TN4Liberty]

LEVEL 3.1 tin foil alert ...

I forget... is that orange tin foil or yellow tin foil?

[steveegg]

If you had the Algore team in the White House, I'd believe that. I think that the Bush team is a bit closer to my way of thinking, which is that Baghdad would be the second target after Mecca.

[Travis McGee]

I am amazed at the number of folks who cannot grasp this elemental truth.

[seeker41]

More recently, UN inspectors have learned that Iraq's first bomb design, which weighed a ton and was a full meter in diameter, was replaced by a smaller, more efficient model. From discussions with the Iraqis, the inspectors have deduced that the new design weighs only about 600 kilograms and measures only 600 to 650 millimeters in diameter. That makes it small enough to fit on Iraq's Scud-type missiles, some of which are still unaccounted for. Iraq has mastered the key technique of creating an implosive shock wave, which squeezes a bomb's nuclear material enough to trigger a chain reaction. The new Iraqi design also uses a "flying tamper," a refinement that "hammers" the nuclear material to squeeze it even harder, so that bombs can be made smaller without diminishing their explosive force. The inspectors have determined that Iraq now has a successful bomb design and lacks only the material to fuel it.

From iraqwatch.org

[chnsmok]

Debated catalytic warfare in 1963. I see China as the threat.

[Travis McGee]

No doubt there is much Bush and his team know which cannot be told, and a good reason to hurry.

[Travis McGee]

That cannot be ruled out, and must be taken seriously.