[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Terrorists using nuclear weapons? (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 5/22/2011 8:33:13 PM EDT
|
Is that a realistic idea? Could a non government group construct a nuclear device or steal one? |
|
Quoted: Quoted: of course it is. its inevitable Yes but the end of the world is inevitable. Are you thinking ten year or a hundred years? who knows. obviously they are having a very hard time obtaining one, otherwise they would light the fuse on that fucker immediately. but all it takes is one little fuck up and them to be in the right place at the right time |
|
There is A LOT of fissionable material "out and about". One of the things that is not discussed are Krytrons and slapper detonators, also called (EFI). A good quality detonation requires a high quality timer and high explosive.
I'm not too worried about a true fission/fusion device, but a dirty bomb type of detonation would be just as bad as a terror weapon because of the public's poorly understood conception of nuclear weapons and how they work. Spreading Plutonium over a large area with a poor grade explosive still tends to ruin one's day. The clean up/ remediation and containment of such a scene would be a mofo. |
|
Construct- Yes, any half decent physics grad student can construct one. The only thing hard about constructing them is getting the enriched material... that is the thing we've tried to prevent iran from doing.
Steal/buy- probably ... from former soviet countries or pakistan if it gets any worse. |
|
Am I wrong but doesn't it seem the amount of personnel with the skillset and the proper gear required to construct a nuclear bomb would be pretty hard to keep quiet? Quoted: That seems a little more plausible to me. Isn't it a LOT easier to get the material required for something like this?, but a dirty bomb type of detonation would be just as bad as a terror weapon because of the public's poorly understood conception of nuclear weapons and how they work. |
|
Sounds like you might pick up a copy of 'Sum of All Fears'.
The reality of one being constructed is pretty low, IMO. Nuclear material aside, the basic of construction require the absolute finest equipment, operated by the most experienced technicians, and maintained in accordance to strict standards and tolerances. Not exactly something you do in a mudhut. Even then it takes time. I imagine the company's who make the necessary equipment are closely monitored and/or disclose their clientele. Just a lot to 'slip by'. Now, a device to generally cause a radioactive mess? A lot easier. Still, for the cost, time, etc. I think it would be easier to buy one from some Russian general who needs a new villa for his retirement. Isn't it established that a lot of Russia's warheads are unaccounted for after the breakup of the USSR? |
|
Quoted: Don't know if I believe it. Wasn't it dis proven a while back especially the "suitcase nukes" case. Doesn't it take a lot of manpower and equipment to keep nuclear weapons in working order? Isn't it established that a lot of Russia's warheads are unaccounted for after the breakup of the USSR? |
|
Quoted:
Am I wrong but doesn't it seem the amount of personnel with the skillset and the proper gear required to construct a nuclear bomb would be pretty hard to keep quiet? Quoted:
That seems a little more plausible to me. Isn't it a LOT easier to get the material required for something like this?
, but a dirty bomb type of detonation would be just as bad as a terror weapon because of the public's poorly understood conception of nuclear weapons and how they work. Yes, especially after the breakup of the old Soviet Union. Fissile material is "relatively" easy to acquire. Money solves a lot of problems. Again, the electonics and triggering systems are the tricky part and much more tightly controlled. And the smart guys don't work for free, couple that with an illicit enterprise and their price goes WAY up. Then there's the delivery system. Nuclear weapons aren't for amateurs and there's a reason why it's so hard to develop and employ them. You can make a dirty bomb out of hospital nuclear medicine waster. That is about as detailed as I'm going to go into this subject. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Don't know if I believe it. Wasn't it dis proven a while back especially the "suitcase nukes" case. Doesn't it take a lot of manpower and equipment to keep nuclear weapons in working order?
Isn't it established that a lot of Russia's warheads are unaccounted for after the breakup of the USSR? I really don't know, either. Seems like it was in the media a lot way back. Kind of an "Oh, noes we're all gonna die" angle. That is a good point though, doesn't strike me as something you set and forget. But then, seems like weapons, etc. are made to be durable. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Am I wrong but doesn't it seem the amount of personnel with the skillset and the proper gear required to construct a nuclear bomb would be pretty hard to keep quiet? Quoted:
That seems a little more plausible to me. Isn't it a LOT easier to get the material required for something like this?
, but a dirty bomb type of detonation would be just as bad as a terror weapon because of the public's poorly understood conception of nuclear weapons and how they work. Yes, especially after the breakup of the old Soviet Union. Fissile material is "relatively" easy to acquire. Money solves a lot of problems. Again, the electonics and triggering systems are the tricky part and much more tightly controlled. And the smart guys don't work for free, couple that with an illicit enterprise and their price goes WAY up. Then there's the delivery system. Nuclear weapons aren't for amateurs and there's a reason why it's so hard to develop and employ them. You can make a dirty bomb out of hospital nuclear medicine waster. That is about as detailed as I'm going to go into this subject. You could probably shortcut the triggering/explosives/electronics issues for the most part by going for a gun-type device. Inefficient, bulky, and massive, but you'd still achieve fission. Delivery, as has been pointed out a bazillion times, would be more than easy enough via a conex container. In all honesty, the best theory I've seen floating around on occasion is the simple fact that terrorists, in general, lack the education, financial resources, or expertise to beg/borrow/steal fissile materials or functional warheads. The evidence would suggest that the former USSR would make for a relatively easy shopping trip for someone with the money and a few neurons to rub together, but yet no one apparently ever has. So either there's something preventing the straightforward bribery/theft method from working, or more realistically, there isn't a dedicated effort from anyone with the capability to pull off a criminal action of that size. Personally, I'd wager good money that the Mexican drug cartels could get a nuclear weapon in a matter of months if they so desired it. Cartels that have proven themselves capable of arming and training large numbers of infantry, smuggling enormous quantities of arms and drugs, and who have built their own functional submarines, should be more than capable of acquiring enriched uranium and constructing a bomb. There's simply no reason on earth why they'd want to have or use one, given the geopolitical consequences of detonating anything containing fissile material pretty much anywhere in the Western hemisphere. In sum, those who can, don't want to. Those who want to, can't. |
|
Quoted:
Is that a realistic idea? Could a non government group construct a nuclear device or steal one? It is unlikely to be a former Soviet device. Nuclear weapons aren't something someone could get and stick in their basement for twenty years, pull it out and have it be fully operational. That's really not how they work. Regardless of whether it's a Plutonium or Uranium bomb, they both start degrading the moment they're shaped. It's why they're radioactive. After a while you've got to replace the fissile material or your bomb won't go boom. It'll only fizzle, or be a really shitty dirty bomb, and that's if the explosive used just to set off the nuclear reaction hasn't degraded to the point it too won't work. If a nuclear weapon does go off on US soil, it would be easily traced to its point of origin and retribution would be swift. Now if you said, Terrorists using a radiological bomb, then yes, I agree that it is inevitable that at some point some hadjis will get their grubby hands on a sizeable amount of radiological materiel, wrap it around a large amount of explosives, and set it off somewhere. With the level of public hysteria surrounding even small amounts of radiation, panic induced chaos would rule wherever it happened. I'm still surprised that the hadjis haven't just gone and gotten a hundred guys, armed them with RomAKs and drums, and sent them to a large mall like the Mall Of America. They'd be able to murder thousands before they were killed and it would utterly ruin the shopping year, i.e. the economy, if they staggered it out over a couple weeks to months. People would expect it to happen again and again if the hadjis did it that way. |
|
Pakistan has nukes.
There's a lot of America haters in Pakistan. There's (a lot) of people who sympathize with the America haters that are in the Pakistan military/intelligence sector. Pakistan isn't the most stable country in the world. The nukes don't have to reach America, we got people in countries that are very close. Or they could launch at India and really stir shit up. I think that's more plausible than any one of them building a bomb. Plus I think they notice how much havoc they can create even with a failed attempt. |
|
Quoted:
Pakistan has nukes. There's a lot of America haters in Pakistan. There's (a lot) of people who sympathize with the America haters that are in the Pakistan military/intelligence sector. Pakistan isn't the most stable country in the world. The nukes don't have to reach America, we got people in countries that are very close. Or they could launch at India and really stir shit up. I think that's more plausible than any one of them building a bomb. Plus I think they notice how much havoc they can create even with a failed attempt. Yep, and the 9/11 attacks changed the whole.Terrorists are poor, uneducated lowlife, loners who are easily brainwashed". They were some highly educated, married, intelligent creatures. (I will not grace them with the sobriquet of "men") There will come a time, in the not so distant future, where some Paki scientist will say, "You know what? Fuck it!" and take the leap. |
|
Quoted:
I'm surprised a "dirty bomb" hasn't already been detonated. As for a real fission or fusion device? I'd say the odds are fairly low right now, but sooner or later either the Norks or the Pakis will do something stupid and let one "slip" out of their control. Yep, and RNA shit scares the bageezus out of me. Somebody is going to do something stupid, just becuz! |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Don't know if I believe it. Wasn't it dis proven a while back especially the "suitcase nukes" case. Doesn't it take a lot of manpower and equipment to keep nuclear weapons in working order?
Isn't it established that a lot of Russia's warheads are unaccounted for after the breakup of the USSR? Manpower is part of the terrorist's problems. They couldn't ignite a shoe (or a crotch for that matter) on an airplane. Do I think we will be hit one day? Yes, eventually but, I am more worried about small attacks- a terrorist in the movie theater with a firearm, blowing themselves up in a mall, etc. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
of course it is. its inevitable My brother is a physicist, not its not. I'm a physicist. Yes, it is. I highly doubt that a bunch of uneducated fools have the ability to manufacture a nuclear bomb. Its pretty hard to time things down to the milisecond when you deficate in a hole. Using a nuke is one thing, making something other than a dirty bomb is another. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: of course it is. its inevitable My brother is a physicist, not its not. I'm a physicist. Yes, it is. I highly doubt that a bunch of uneducated fools have the ability to manufacture a nuclear bomb. Its pretty hard to time things down to the milisecond when you deficate in a hole. Using a nuke is one thing, making something other than a dirty bomb is another. What took the most educated back in the 40s can be done today by a high-school dropout... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
of course it is. its inevitable My brother is a physicist, not its not. I'm a physicist. Yes, it is. I highly doubt that a bunch of uneducated fools have the ability to manufacture a nuclear bomb. Its pretty hard to time things down to the milisecond when you deficate in a hole. Using a nuke is one thing, making something other than a dirty bomb is another. It's not nearly as complicated to replicate the technology as you seem to want to believe. The only somwhat difficult part is obtaining the fissionable material. The rest is just maximizing the efficiency of the yield. But, whatever helps you sleep at night. |
|
If they could sneak enough fissile material into the US they could build a bomb capable of going high order, fission isn't too difficult to obtain but they would need someone with the knowledge to produce the right explosives and build a working device. That doesn't seem very likely though when the last terror attacks couldn't even produce a functioning explosive device. The Times Square bomber couldn't produce acetone peroxide which is so simple school kids make it on you tube forcing him to use firecrackers so the thought of them producing something so complex as nuclear bomb is ludicrous.
The fissile material is the hardest part of making a nuclear device, you need a large enriching operation and very large quantities of unenriched material to get even small amounts of fissile material. That leaves only countries with the ability to produce it but terrorist could still get it through theft or the black market, though that too is unlikely. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
of course it is. its inevitable My brother is a physicist, not its not. I'm a physicist. Yes, it is. I highly doubt that a bunch of uneducated fools have the ability to manufacture a nuclear bomb. Its pretty hard to time things down to the milisecond when you deficate in a hole. Using a nuke is one thing, making something other than a dirty bomb is another. There are a lot of highly educated terrorist, doctors, scientists, professors and others have been known to be involved in terror. |
|
Quoted:
Construct- Yes, any half decent physics grad student can construct one. The only thing hard about constructing them is getting the enriched material... that is the thing we've tried to prevent iran from doing. Steal/buy- probably ... from former soviet countries or pakistan if it gets any worse. There's a difference between a physicist, an engineer, and a technician. Remember the Manhattan Project? It wasn't called the Manhattan Lone Physicist. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Is that a realistic idea? Could a non government group construct a nuclear device or steal one? It is unlikely to be a former Soviet device. Nuclear weapons aren't something someone could get and stick in their basement for twenty years, pull it out and have it be fully operational. That's really not how they work. Regardless of whether it's a Plutonium or Uranium bomb, they both start degrading the moment they're shaped. It's why they're radioactive. After a while you've got to replace the fissile material or your bomb won't go boom. It'll only fizzle, or be a really shitty dirty bomb, and that's if the explosive used just to set off the nuclear reaction hasn't degraded to the point it too won't work. If a nuclear weapon does go off on US soil, it would be easily traced to its point of origin and retribution would be swift. Now if you said, Terrorists using a radiological bomb, then yes, I agree that it is inevitable that at some point some hadjis will get their grubby hands on a sizeable amount of radiological materiel, wrap it around a large amount of explosives, and set it off somewhere. With the level of public hysteria surrounding even small amounts of radiation, panic induced chaos would rule wherever it happened. I'm still surprised that the hadjis haven't just gone and gotten a hundred guys, armed them with RomAKs and drums, and sent them to a large mall like the Mall Of America. They'd be able to murder thousands before they were killed and it would utterly ruin the shopping year, i.e. the economy, if they staggered it out over a couple weeks to months. People would expect it to happen again and again if the hadjis did it that way. ^^ This guy knows what he's talking about. Notice he said "radiological material." It doesn't need to be enriched whatever-you've-heard-on-TV. Simple slightly radioactive waste would suffice. Also, terrorists have learned they don't even need to successfully set their dicks on fire to cause terror. They could do a hundred Mumbai-style attacks for the cost and effort of a dirty bomb. |
|
Problems for the terrs are getting the fissile material, very precise machining that is required of some components, and quite a number of things that must occur in a specific sequence ...all in a millisecond.
Don't worry about it. There are guys in Iran who are working overtime to make it a reality. 
|
|
Quoted:
Most of the "experts" say it's very likely within the next 5-10 years to see a dirty bomb detonated somewhere here in the US. Hell, I would not be surprised if the bomb is already here. Link to said experts? If a bomb were here, it would be detonated. They wouldn't just sit around waiting to get caught, or, more likely, get radiated to death by their own dirty bomb. |
|
Quoted:
A "gun" type nuke, while less efficient, does not require the timed implosion.
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
of course it is. its inevitable My brother is a physicist, not its not. I'm a physicist. Yes, it is. I highly doubt that a bunch of uneducated fools have the ability to manufacture a nuclear bomb. Its pretty hard to time things down to the milisecond when you deficate in a hole. Using a nuke is one thing, making something other than a dirty bomb is another. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
of course it is. its inevitable My brother is a physicist, not its not. I'm a physicist. Yes, it is. I highly doubt that a bunch of uneducated fools have the ability to manufacture a nuclear bomb. Its pretty hard to time things down to the milisecond when you deficate in a hole. Using a nuke is one thing, making something other than a dirty bomb is another. The weasel word here is "inevitable." In a thousand years I expect technology will be to the point that a lone person can build a nuclear weapon and deliver it anywhere on the earth. That's not happening in my lifetime, or my childrens', so to me, it's impossible. |
|
Quoted:
Pakistan has nukes. There's a lot of America haters in Pakistan. There's (a lot) of people who sympathize with the America haters that are in the Pakistan military/intelligence sector. Pakistan isn't the most stable country in the world. The nukes don't have to reach America, we got people in countries that are very close. Or they could launch at India and really stir shit up. I think that's more plausible than any one of them building a bomb. Plus I think they notice how much havoc they can create even with a failed attempt. Especially now with Pakistan in turmoil after the OBL face raping... Look at what raven posted yesterday about militants storming the navy base.... |
|
Quoted:
What took the most educated back in the 40s can be done today by a high-school dropout... Not even close. I don't know a lot of high school drop outs who could construct a mechanical computer that could break Enigma, or GED holders who could independently develop Radar. |
|
People want to focus on the fantastic, at the expense of the mundane. A group of terrorists detonating a nuke is pretty fantastic and equally unlikely. A group of terrorists walking around a city in teams of 2, shooting people and throwing grenades, it much easier and causes just as much terror.
I don't worry about nukes and dirty bombs. I worry about terrorists lighting themselves on fire then getting their asses handed to them by the other passengers. That worries me because we get more intensive pat downs, we have our rights restricted, and the terrorists win. We waste money responding to specific threats and the last attack. Bad guys don't need a nuke. They just have to set themselves on fire for a few seconds. |
|
Here's a web post from The Belmont Club regarding how the game would likely play out once the terrorists got nukes. Scary read. http://belmontclub.blogspot.com/2003/09/three-conjectures-pew-poll-finds-40-of.html Give it a read. |
|
A radiological device worries me just as much as a nuke. Look at how many people went crazy over the reactor incident in Japan. People stopped drinking milk , among a hundred other things. A detonation of one even on the east coast would scare the heck out of millions of people, enough to make a major impact on our economy. 9/11 did a HUGE number on our economy and that was just 4 airplanes.
|
Shit like this happening in a nuclear country doesn't make me feel any better;Pakistani commandos retake Karachi naval baseTaliban militants lose control of base 18 hours after deadly attack seen by many as a humiliating blow to Pakistan's military http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/23/pakistan-commandos-retake-karachi-base JOhn |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
of course it is. its inevitable Yes but the end of the world is inevitable. Are you thinking ten year or a hundred years? who knows. obviously they are having a very hard time obtaining one, otherwise they would light the fuse on that fucker immediately. but all it takes is one little fuck up and them to be in the right place at the right time I don't think them not popping one off is an indicator that they don't have it. Lot's of things to do before setting one off and things even terrorists have to consider so I wouldn't count on that as an indicator. They could have 10 of them for all anyone knows. I also don't think it would need to be a declared nuclear power that gives it to them or that they would get it from. |