The Nukular Scenario

Would the U.S. use it's own nuclear arsenal in retaliation???

[thirsty moore]

Did you just watch The Day After or something?

Originally posted by econo:
  Did you just watch The Day After or something?

No, it was Aaron Brown.  The talking heads were saying that a 100 kiloton attack was rather likely.  That kind of puts the fear into me.

[evilsanta]

Originally posted by econo:
  Ay... dios mio.
 
   

Originally posted by nkotbie:
  I, for one, am sickened by your blatant anti-Mexicanism.  For shame, Thirsty.  For shame...

[/b]

watch for the cease and desist letter from dio

[Guiny]

Originally posted by Mr.Shagslikeadonkey:
 Many of the Hiroshima victims lived for a few days after the fireball before their skin liquefied. [/QB]

By liquid hot magma. (Dr. Evil Voice)

[ggw]

Who were the talking heads? (skip the Byrne/Frantz/Weymouth/Harrison jokes please)
 
 And why do they find this likely?  North Korea?  Pakistan after an Islamist coup?  I mean, who has the capability to deliver a 100 kiloton explosion to the U.S. mainland?
 
 I think the more likely scenario is the slow bleed -- bomb a few malls, take out some rail and trucking infrastructure -- and make us suffer under uncertainty and an anemic economy over an extended period.
 
 

Originally posted by Mr.Shagslikeadonkey:
 No, it was Aaron Brown.  The talking heads were saying that a 100 kiloton attack was rather likely.  That kind of puts the fear into me.

Those nameless pundits were especially concerned with containers.  As in container ships.  As in thousands of uninspected containers each day.  Watch for it.  I'm sure CNN will run it again.

[evilsanta]

Originally posted by Mr.Shagslikeadonkey:
  Those nameless pundits were especially concerned with containers.  As in container ships.  As in thousands of uninspected containers each day.  Watch for it.  I'm sure CNN will run it again.

and if they tried to inspect or track all those containers the economy would grind to a halt..

Originally posted by evilsanta:
   and if they tried to inspect or track all those containers the economy would grind to a halt..

You must have seen the CNN report?

[ggw]

But I doubt that al-Qaeda could feasibly get a bomb of that size and successfully get it into the U.S. and detonate it.  That's a pretty tall order.
 
 I would think that a conventional explosion at a port would be more likely -- and not that difficult.  There are something like 200 hijackings of large ships every year in the Straits of Malacca alone.  Many of the ships subsequently "disappear".  Last year there was a huge chemical freighter hijacked and then abandoned after an hour.  The theory is that it was just a test run.  Why not hijack one, sail into port and blow it up.  Or do it in multiple ports on the same day.
 
 The point is, I think that a series of smaller disruptive attacks are infinitely more probable than a large nuclear attack on a major city.
 
 

Originally posted by Mr.Shagslikeadonkey:
  Those nameless pundits were especially concerned with containers.  As in container ships.  As in thousands of uninspected containers each day.  Watch for it.  I'm sure CNN will run it again.

[evilsanta]

Originally posted by Mr.Shagslikeadonkey:
   

Originally posted by evilsanta:
   and if they tried to inspect or track all those containers the economy would grind to a halt..

You must have seen the CNN report? [/b]

nope my uncle writes for a transport magazine and was saying this when congress was getting up tight about containers ships post 9/11

Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
  But I doubt that al-Qaeda could feasibly get a bomb of that size and successfully get it into the U.S. and detonate it.  That's a pretty tall order.
 

What?  It wouldn't fit into a container?  The technology's 60 years old.  Iran or Pyongyang could supply the components to the terrorists.

[ggw]

The ease of building a bomb is vastly overstated.  Beyond the inherent difficulty in acquiring and transporting enough fissile material, there a thousand other potential difficulties in the design and construction of such a device.
 
 

Originally posted by Mr.Shagslikeadonkey:
   

Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
  But I doubt that al-Qaeda could feasibly get a bomb of that size and successfully get it into the U.S. and detonate it.  That's a pretty tall order.
 

What?  It wouldn't fit into a container?  The technology's 60 years old.  Iran or Pyongyang could supply the components to the terrorists. [/b]

[Liberte]

Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
  Who were the talking heads? (skip the Byrne/Frantz/Weymouth/Harrison jokes please)
 
 And why do they find this likely?  North Korea?  Pakistan after an Islamist coup?  I mean, who has the capability to deliver a 100 kiloton explosion to the U.S. mainland?
 
 I think the more likely scenario is the slow bleed -- bomb a few malls, take out some rail and trucking infrastructure -- and make us suffer under uncertainty and an anemic economy over an extended period.
 
   

Originally posted by Mr.Shagslikeadonkey:
 No, it was Aaron Brown.  The talking heads were saying that a 100 kiloton attack was rather likely.  That kind of puts the fear into me.

[/b]

You're probably correct that a conventional explosive attack is more feasible right now.  However, certain cargos could make a big enough bang--and mushroom cloud--that the immediate panic factor would be comparable to a nuclear attack.  I have read that a fully loaded LNG tanker would actually pack the wallop of a tactical nuke.
 
 The prospect of al-Quaeda getting its hands on a real nuke, unfortunately, may be less remote than you think.  The likely source would be Pakistan, which has decentralized both the physical locations and comand-and-control infrastructure for its nukes, in order to head off a pre-emptive strike by India.  Some of those bad boys are parked in places, and under the control of generals who used to be patrons of the Taliban, which make their safekeeping in the event of a coup or major civil disturbance fairly problematic.  These are existing, deployable, mobile, and ready-to-go ordnance, not a hypothetical build-from-scratch job for terrorist-sympathizing mad scientists.