|
|
|
|
lpetrich
Skeptic Friend
USA
74 Posts |
 Posted - 10/06/2001 : 05:00:28
|
Osama bin Laden's men might already have some, although according to one Time-magazine story, they were gypped when they tried to get some, instead receiving some reactor-grade uranium and radioactive waste.
However, if they got a hold of some nuclear weapons, they might want to test their acquisitions. But doing so would show up on seismographs in neighboring countries with a very unmistakable signature: pressure with very little shear, as opposed to earthquakes with similar strengths of both. And comparing the arrival times would allow quick pinpointing of the bomb's location.
The next step would be to smuggle the bombs into the intended-victim nations. This would actually be easy with the help of an oil tanker and some friendly crew. Al Qaeda could assign some of its men to work in some oil tanker that makes regular runs to the Persian Gulf, and while the tanker is docked, the bomb could be smuggled aboard. AQ's ship crew then watches over the bombs as the ship makes its way toward the bombs' intended target. The ship will likely dock several km away from some likely target, but when it does, the bombs can be smuggled off of it. Once there, the bombs can be carried by car to their intended targets.
This would produce a groundburst; for maximum destructive effect, it is preferable to explode a nuclear bomb a kilometer or so in the air. An airburst can easily be managed by loading a bomb in a private plane and then dropping it. Or even exploding it without dropping it, a possibility given some AQ members' willingness to go on kamikaze missions.
The most likely bombs for AQ to get would be relatively low-yield ones, comparable to the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs (~20 kilotons). These bombs produced the bulk of their destructive effects within 2 or 3 kilometers of their explosion location, which gives a guide as to what to expect.
If exploded inside a city center, such a bomb would destroy it, but would have relatively little effect on the city's suburbs, aside from its fallout. If exploded at the WTC site, such a bomb would devastate Lower Manhattan, and if exploded in Washington between the White House and the Congress building, both would likely be severely damaged, if not destroyed.
|
|
|
marvin
Skeptic Friend
77 Posts |
Posted - 10/07/2001 : 12:05:50 [Permalink]
|
I've always felt that during the state of the union address is when the political leadership of America is at its most vulnerable. Also the financial capital of America is arguably Wall Street, an attack there would send the stock market reeling to unrecorded lows. New York City is the linchpin of the American financial empire, it probably is target number one.
Another possibility is a ‘dirty bomb' of radioactive material exploded inside of a small airplane so it would rain down on top of a city causing perhaps permanent evacuation of the affected area. |
 |
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 10/07/2001 : 12:35:27 [Permalink]
|
Forget nuclear weapons. Imagine what a plane loaded with explosives could do if it hit a nuclear power plant.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Kaptain K
New Member
USA
45 Posts |
Posted - 10/07/2001 : 15:47:14 [Permalink]
|
quote:
The next step would be to smuggle the bombs into the intended-victim nations. This would actually be easy with the help of an oil tanker and some friendly crew. Al Qaeda could assign some of its men to work in some oil tanker that makes regular runs to the Persian Gulf, and while the tanker is docked, the bomb could be smuggled aboard. AQ's ship crew then watches over the bombs as the ship makes its way toward the bombs' intended target. The ship will likely dock several km away from some likely target, but when it does, the bombs can be smuggled off of it. Once there, the bombs can be carried by car to their intended targets.
No need to go to all that trouble. Just load it into a "land-sea" container, load container deep in the bowels of a freighter bound for (insert harbor of choice). Detonate remotely at destination (requires one suicide operator to get close enough to detonate bomb while inside ship). Alternative - put bomb on timer and hope shipment isn't delayed.
A small nuke would not vaporise the entire multi-ton freighter. The rest would be incredibly damaging (and deadly) shrapnel.
Edited by - Kaptain K on 10/07/2001 15:48:46 |
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 10/07/2001 : 16:52:46 [Permalink]
|
There are approximately 166 Soviet backpack nuclear devices missing since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Just thought you'd like to know.
"Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith. I consider the capacity for it terrifying." ~Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. |
|
|
|
Kaptain K
New Member
USA
45 Posts |
Posted - 10/08/2001 : 01:10:19 [Permalink]
|
quote:
There are approximately 166 Soviet backpack nuclear devices missing since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Just thought you'd like to know.
That is truely frightening. Can you give sources?
|
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 10/08/2001 : 05:01:19 [Permalink]
|
NSA
"Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith. I consider the capacity for it terrifying." ~Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 10/08/2001 : 08:55:16 [Permalink]
|
I dunno. I think if they could have nuked the WTC and lower Manhattan they would have. They wouldn't have had to sacrifice so many of there own. They would have caused more damage and we would have been just as pissed off. A well placed nuke would have made a much better first strike weapon for them. It would have also instilled a much deeper sense of terror in us. Therefor, I doubt that they can do it. Also, if they nuke us the rest of Islam, eventual targets of the Taliban if they don't turn to their fanatical interpretation of the religion, would surly rise against them. They over played their hand as it is....
The Evil Skeptic
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Kaptain K
New Member
USA
45 Posts |
Posted - 10/08/2001 : 09:07:26 [Permalink]
|
I hope that bin Laden is not stupid enough to use nukes (if he has them). The absolute minimum result would be the slagging of Afghanistan. The most probable result would be the slagging of Afghanistan AND WW3 and the end of civilization.
|
|
|
|
Starman
SFN Regular
Sweden
1613 Posts |
Posted - 10/08/2001 : 09:18:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I hope that bin Laden is not stupid enough to use nukes (if he has them).
I think he would use a nuke if he could. If a person/organization is willing to kill 5-50 000 civilians, why would they stop at that?
Remember this is a holy war for pig Laden. Why would he act sane?
Let's hope nobody was stupid enough to sell him the nukes.
"A society without religion is like a crazed psychopath without a loaded .45"
Edited by - StarMan on 10/08/2001 09:20:29 |
|
|
|
marvin
Skeptic Friend
77 Posts |
Posted - 10/08/2001 : 15:24:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Forget nuclear weapons. Imagine what a plane loaded with explosives could do if it hit a nuclear power plant. ---@tomic
I worked at the nuclear power plant Vogtel II south of Augusta Georgia in the containment building, that's where the nuclear reactor is. The reactor chamber is not very big compared to the containment building. It took about six months to pour the concrete 24 hours a day 7 days a week, with a ~24{?} foot thick concrete bottom and six{?} foot thick round top, looks like a ‘weeble' an egg shaped toy of the 80s “weebles wobble, but they don't fall down” most of it is buried under ground.
Inside the cement of the egg shaped top, along with the rebar, are steel stranded cables covered in plastic, spaced every few feet. After a few years the cement partially cures then the post-tensioning contractors use hydraulic equipment to tighten the cables. This caused the top of the containment vessel to shrink in diameter rumored to be six feet, at the time.
The rumor was, and I believe this is universally standard for all commercial ‘nukes', that the vessel could withstand the direct impact of a 747 airliner. I don't know what would happen if an airliner crashed into the cooling towers though. It can take as little as two weeks to bring the nuke on line, shut down takes much longer to cool off. Three Mile Island was still warm after ten years.
I say commercial nukes because the government has several, ‘open air reactors' with no containment vessel enclosure. They are used to manufacture weapons grade tritium and plutonium. Probably not used too much anymore, however they do stockpile nuclear weapons.
Vogtle Unit #2~ Someone decided to remove all pictures of nuclear power plants from the Internet:
quote:
The page you requested cannot be found on this server. Please check your URL for spelling errors. If you requested access to the maps of nuclear power reactor locations, these maps have been taken off-line temporarily pending the outcome of a policy review by the US Department of Energy and Argonne National Laboratory.
There were detailed maps and pictures of nuclear plants worldwide.
Savanna River Operations Office the 310 square mile facility run by the Atomic Energy Commission, just across the Savanna River, South Carolina, from the Vogtle nukes, it has or had four open air nuclear reactors.
Spoke too soon, pictures are still available, not as good as the NRC's were.
Edited by - marvin on 10/08/2001 15:32:31 |
|
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
