TERROR OF BIN LADEN'S 20 BACKPACK NUKES developing

Drudgereport.com ^ | drudge

[hflynn]

If Osama Bin Laden had nuclear weapons he would have used them on 9/11, or in Afghanistan, or in Yemen or in Qatar, or Saudi Arabia. Instead we are to believe he has them but elected not to use them while the United States ousted the Taliban, bombed Al-Qaida back to the stone age, and continues to conduct a massive build-up in the Middle East to oust the goverments of Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, etc? I don't thing so.

[hflynn]

thing = think

[willyone]

You need to take a logic class. Do you think Bin laden personally would be involved?

[willyone]

Thats funny. I have spent alot of time around nukes and I don't remember them being touched in any way for months at a time.

[willyone]

KGB and NKVD are part of the military. They control the military.

[willyone]

Good points. Prhaps the plan is to blow up the suitcase device with a conventional bomb to make a dirty bomb. That will contaminate an area for years.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

Didn't President Bush mention something about nuclear retaliation the other day if anyone were to use weapons of mass destruction against us?

That's what I was wondering. Even if the triggers could deteriorate, could they be used as dirty nukes with enough dynomite or fertilizer? Not nearly as scary. But also, the possibility of a trigger expert being hired, that would keep a commander-in-chief up at nights.

No matter what, I believe one thing: we must defeat this evil, the sooner the better. Or they will destroy us. Worse case scenario: maybe we only catch half of these clowns and only lose half of our cities.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

You were right to post it. This is Drudge we are talking about. Drudge does not have a lousy track record like Debka.

[willyone]

The ideal would be to explode one in one of the Arab countries. We get the blame they get the martyrs. That should fire them up for a hundred years or so.

[ASA Vet]

Time to start searching everyone with a backpack

Only wheel chair bound grannies and
80 year old Medal of Honor winners need to be searched.
//end sarcasim//

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

They need the very thing that the Iraq "peaceful" nuclear plants produce as a by-product, tritium.

Then we go full circle, back to GW's plan to attack Iraq.

[ASA Vet]

It's just that the "shot" load is made of neutrons and
other atomic particles instead of lead.

So you can see why no medicine of any sort is likely to save you,
no matter whether it's taken before or after exposure

How about if the medicine contains "plug a leak?"
It works for punctured tires. ;o)

[defenderSD]

....lunchbox nukes, coffee grinder nukes, cigar box nukes, and of course the terrible micro-wristwatch nukes (which caused so many tragic left-arm amputations in the Iran/Iraq war.)

[wcbtinman]

"how would kgb agents get nukes?"

There is some evidence that the Soviets pre-placed these so-called suitcase nukes in various places in the US, many years ago.

All the KGB guys have to do is sell the locations of the nukes.

We may never catch them smuggling them in, because they are alredy here.

[areafiftyone]

How kind of you to say that!

[wcbtinman]

"Knowledge that planes might be used as missles"

Tom Clancy wrote about this very scenario in the book "Debt of Honor". This was copyrighted in 1994. Clancy has a working relationship with many of the higher-ups in the govt.

Lots of people knew it was possible.

[judicial meanz]

Me either. Lived, ate, slept and bunked by them in about 10 years on submarines, and I never remember worrying about the shelf life of initiators.

[Jeff Chandler]

Not to mention the dreaded Mickey Mouse wristwatch nuke.

[EternalHope]

Thanks for helping dispel one of the persistent myths about small nukes. I was wondering when someone on this thread would correct the misconception that nukes need to have the "fissionable material" and "electronics" serviced every 60 days. (Yours was the first post I found correcting the misconception.)

For some reason, people do not understand the difference between fission and fusion nuclear bombs. A suitcase nuke would be very simple, small, and make a very small bang (for a nuke). I assume it would use plutonium, with enough extra fissionable material to not need servicing for YEARS. The electronics would be very simple (for a nuke), and stable as well.

Congress held some hearings when the suitcase nuke info first came out. It was many years ago (ten years?), but a mock-up was shown on the news. The mock-up was shown installed in a larger but still typical briefcase.

I don't know where the notion developed that the smallest nukes have to be as big as a steamer trunk, and need frequent servicing (wishful thinking, perhaps). Some certainly would, but definitely NOT all.

A myth has circulated for quite a while that all nukes must be relatively big and need frequent servicing. I wish it were so.

[philman_36]

Lots of people knew it was possible.
Lots more seem to want to live in La-La land and think that it was never thought of before 9/11.