Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Sikboy on June 10, 2002, 10:02:15 AM
-
http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/06/10/dirty.bomb.suspect/index.html
[edit] I'd be VERY interested to know if he had access to fissile materials, or any radioactive materials of any type. I mean, he would need these for such a device. How much, and where did it come from. If the answer two question B is "Pakistan" I wonder if we'll ever hear about it?
-Sikboy
-
I can only conclude that because they waited a month to tell us of this that they are actively looking for more individuals?
-
You don't need the evil axis to supply you with radioactive materials, you can find that stuff right here in the good old US of A. Food processing plants and hospitals use cobalt-60 and cesium-137 for killing bacteria and treating certain kinds of cancer. There's also plutonium and americium, plutonium was used at some universities in research. Americium is used in the oil industry to dectect fossil fuels and of course those smoke detectors you have in your home.
Though short term damage is going to minimal after detonation. Long term exposure to a contaminated area where a dirty bomb went off could cause serious health problems in the future.
-
You don't need fissionable material for a dirty bomb.
-
Originally posted by Intrepid
You don't need to be supplied radioactive materials by the evil axis. Hospitals and food processing plants right here in the United States have just what he's looking for.
You're absolutly right. The performance of the bomb is directly related to the radioactivity of the "dirty" part. The higher the better for the terrorist. Of course the higher the riskier too. I was operating under the impression that medical waste was not as radioactive as reactor waste (eg spent fuel rods), but it looks like I was barking up the wrong tree.
-Sikboy
-
Hope they "in-terror-gate" him well...
-
Originally posted by Dowding
You don't need fissionable material for a dirty bomb.
Yeah, bad wording on my part.
-Sikboy
-
And the dreaded asbestos bomb ;)
-
Is this the new Ron Jeremy porn movie? The title suits him well...
:D
Daniel
-
I see "the sky is falling" again. If Jose got his hands on a Dirty Bomb. It would likely kill fewer people than 9.11. If detonated in a big city, it would slow commerce badly during the clean up. But the world as we know it, would hardly end.
The scariest part of this, for me. Is that Jose (a U.S. citizen) just had his constitutional rights chucked, like they were nothing. He should get a fair trial, then hang him.
-
Originally posted by easymo
I see "the sky is falling" again. If Jose got his hands on a Dirty Bomb. It would likely kill fewer people than 9.11. If detonated in a big city, it would slow commerce badly during the clean up. But the world as we know it, would hardly end.
gotta disagree
what do you think a radioactive sprewing bomb, no matter how large, would do to wallstreet? Wallstreet craps their pants at a drop of a hat? You honestly believe the bottom would not fall out of the markets. With it - massive lay offs, unemployment, bread lines, rioting & looting like nothing ever before. Then you will have your "Police State".
Do you honestly think this country could/would survive a 30's style Depression? Hell we can't get along in the best of times. We riot in the streets when our teams WIN! They don't have to kill us to win, all they have to do is turn us on ourselves...
-
Originally posted by Eagler
gotta disagree
what do you think a radioactive sprewing bomb, no matter how large, would do to wallstreet? Wallstreet craps their pants at a drop of a hat? You honestly believe the bottom would not fall out of the markets. With it - massive lay offs, unemployment, bread lines, rioting & looting like nothing ever before. Then you will have your "Police State".
I agree with Easymo that the effects of a Dirty bomb are being a bit exaggerated. I mean, of course it all depends on the size of the bomb and how much radialogical material there is, but none the less, I don't think that it will plunge us into "Depression II, The Quickening" or anything like that. It was tough, but we made it through Sept. 11th. We'll make it through what they have to offer next. I was also confused by the statement that he was a US citizen. That is pretty concerning to me. I mean, I don't understand how the "unlawfull combatant" tag can be used to get around our constitutional freedoms. Due process seems to have been denied.
-Sikboy
-
Originally posted by Eagler
gotta disagree
what do you think a radioactive sprewing bomb, no matter how large, would do to wallstreet? Wallstreet craps their pants at a drop of a hat? You honestly believe the bottom would not fall out of the markets. With it - massive lay offs, unemployment, bread lines, rioting & looting like nothing ever before. Then you will have your "Police State".
Do you honestly think this country could/would survive a 30's style Depression? Hell we can't get along in the best of times. We riot in the streets when our teams WIN! They don't have to kill us to win, all they have to do is turn us on ourselves...
Wall Street is the real target of any terrorists. Not to spread sunshine on thier intelect, but they aren't complete morons. UBL (OBL) is very financially savy... If the dollar fails, I'm quite sure he believes America fails. Dumbshit has no idea just how tough your average peace loving dim witted poor man in America can be!
Just imagine the wrath of a bunch of Liberals and Conservatives joining hands for a common cause. Hell, just imagine a couple of invading armies trying to take LA after the Crips and Bloods get together. Jeezuz it's scary... We're all Americans... we can piss on eachother but let some foreign source try some BS. I can beat my brother and my brother can beat me.... but don't think we won't defend each other!! Hey Weazel... wanna go kick some as? :D
-
"Dirty Bomb"..It'll be interesting for sure to see how this unfolds.
-
Well apparently he was arrested during "the discussion stage" of this terrorist plan...Time will tell if this was true terrorism in the making(i hope not) or FBI/media sensationalism...I sniff a posterboy here.
The facts will be presented quickly I hope.
-
I'd be more worried about what they do NOT have to build....
How hard is it to get a nuke warhead on a boat, ship it in any ordinary container with a "believable" shipping cargo, get it onto a train, have it transported to any US city and have it detonate by using a GPS setup?
IMO, all that takes is a little cash in the right place... much scarier than these "dirty" bombs.
-SW
poor sentence structure edited out
-
Originally posted by AKSWulfe
I'd be more worried about what they do NOT have to build....
How hard is it to get a nuke warhead on a boat, ship it in any ordinary container with a "believable" shipping cargo, get it onto a train and have it transported to any US city in the world and have it detonate by using a GPS setup?
IMO, all that takes is a little cash in the right place... much scarier than these "dirty" bombs.
-SW
Not hard at all
-
Originally posted by AKSWulfe
I'd be more worried about what they do NOT have to build....
How hard is it to get a nuke warhead [/i]
I think this is the most important part of the question. And it's
Very hard.
-Sikboy
-
If it's not very hard, then why have they not done it already?
-
Well, how hard was it to subdue the airline crews/pilots.. take the plane and fly it into a building... yet it took them a good 3-5 years to get that plan of action to take place.
So it may be less of a question of how hard, and more a question of... when?
Sikboy, you honestly think it's hard to get a nuclear warhead? Russia was selling 'em like candy to the highest bidder not too long ago. If Al Qaeda still has a lotta cash, then what's stopping them from getting their hands on a small nuclear weapon? I'm not talking ICBM size, but still, could be fairly big.
How many mid east countries have nukes they didn't purchase off the black market anyway?
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKSWulfe
Sikboy, you honestly think it's hard to get a nuclear warhead?
Yes, I do. Very hard.
Russia was selling 'em like candy to the highest bidder not too long ago.
No, they weren't.
If Al Qaeda still has a lotta cash, then what's stopping them from getting their hands on a small nuclear weapon? I'm not talking ICBM size, but still, could be fairly big.
The fact that there are none for sale.
How many mid east countries have nukes they didn't purchase off the black market anyway?
The only MidEast country that is generally accepted to have nukes is Israel. No other countries in the region have them.
-Sikboy
-
As much as they hate us. They despise the Jews. If they ever get a nuke, there will be a mushroom cloud popping up over Israel. That will be the official anouncement that we can start worrying.
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
The only MidEast country that is generally accepted to have nukes is Israel. No other countries in the region have them.
-Sikboy
The government thinks otherwise.... (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020610/ap_wo_en_po/rumsfeld_gulf_19)
and you can't say for certain whether or not Iraq poses them or not either.
-SW
-
The news I saw on this stated that the "bomber" was actually on a recon mission...not actively persuing materials to build a bomb.
-
Since they like to play with nuclear waist, why not give them more? US have a lot of waist that can be spread nice and even over that country.;)
-
As much as they hate us. They despise the Jews. If they ever get a nuke, there will be a mushroom cloud popping up over Israel. That will be the official anouncement that we can start worrying.
Theres more jews in NYC then in any city in israel. They could kill 2 birds with 1 stone.
Besides Israel survives asdirect result of the support of the US. nuking israel will just strengthen our support for them.
Make no mistake they would nuke NYC in a second is they had the means.
-
Originally posted by easymo
As much as they hate us. They despise the Jews. If they ever get a nuke, there will be a mushroom cloud popping up over Israel. That will be the official anouncement that we can start worrying.
I doubt it, because said nuke would kill as many arabs as jews.
And besides, they would never dare. They know full well that the Israeli response would be a nuke in Baghdad, one in Teheran, one in Damascus. Perhaps not hitting the ones directly responsible, but the ones responsible enough. Saddam knows this, so does the other goons.
-
Originally posted by easymo
I see "the sky is falling" again. If Jose got his hands on a Dirty Bomb. It would likely kill fewer people than 9.11. If detonated in a big city, it would slow commerce badly during the clean up. But the world as we know it, would hardly end.
The scariest part of this, for me. Is that Jose (a U.S. citizen) just had his constitutional rights chucked, like they were nothing. He should get a fair trial, then hang him.
Man, either you are very optimistic, or you dont know that much about nuclear material.
Worst case scenario, terrorist makes dirty bomb with enriched uranium or plutonium. Effect: Abandon city for next ten thousand years. But I guess one could say it would slow commerce badly...oh...and there is no clean up with those.
-
Originally posted by AKSWulfe
The government thinks otherwise.... (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020610/ap_wo_en_po/rumsfeld_gulf_19)
and you can't say for certain whether or not Iraq poses them or not either.
-SW
I can say for certain that it is doubtfull that they have a bomb. And I think Rummy would back me up. They have a development program for nukes (guess they missed the Russian Fire sale on nukes) but I have yet to hear anyone in the government suggest that they had a working bomb. The catagory of Weapons oif mass destruction inlcudes not only Nuclear (Which Iraq has never had) but also Biological and Chemical. Iraq has had Biological and Chemical weapons. We know this. They want a bomb. We know this too.
The only MidEast country that is generally accepted to have nukes is Israel. No other countries in the region have them.
Looks like the Government actually agrees with me
Anyhow, we've gone from everyone's got a nuke to maybe Iraq has one. Not very compelling.
-Sikboy
-
Originally posted by easymo
As much as they hate us. They despise the Jews. If they ever get a nuke, there will be a mushroom cloud popping up over Israel. That will be the official anouncement that we can start worrying.
Yep
As Wotan stated, they'd kill two birds with one stone by attacking us over Israel if they had the means. Transportation would be the only factor allowing Israel to get it before say Washington, NYC or LA. Then again, if this is truely a "religious war", which I think the extremist justify it in their heads by labeling it that, Rome would be the likely first target followed quickly by an attack on US soil.
I think their first target will be wherever they can damage our financial strenghts the most over say civilian deaths or physical damage. You kill our economy and we'll handle the rest ourselves.
-
Originally posted by Mickey1992
I can only conclude that because they waited a month to tell us of this that they are actively looking for more individuals?
The government holds this information like a trump card. Then when their competency starts to come under increasing scrutiny, they play it!
Incidentally, does anyone remember soon after 9/11 government spokespeople started talking about anthrax and several weeks later we had anthrax laced letters?
And how recently there’s been talk of dirty bombs and then guess what?
How convenient!
Honestly, I believe the US government shovels more propaganda our way than it does to foreign governments.
:rolleyes:
-
Man, either you are very optimistic, or you dont know that much about nuclear material.
Worst case scenario, terrorist makes dirty bomb with enriched uranium or plutonium. Effect: Abandon city for next ten thousand years. But I guess one could say it would slow commerce badly...oh...and there is no clean up with those.
And that comment showed that you know nothing about nuclear material.
First of all dirty bomb with enriched uranium is as dangerous as as dirty bomb with iron. Even enriched uranium's radiation is so miniscule that it's barely noticable. You get much more extra radiation from flying over the Atlantic than from sitting atop of three tons of enriched uranium for the same time. What makes enriched uranium dangerous is that in nuclear reaction it changes to other elements that are much more radioactive, however you will not get that effect without nuclear explosion.
Even in the worst case scenario the damage and radiation is concentrated within few blocks. With conventional explosives there is no high-rising fireball or massive vaporization that makes nuclear bomb's fallout spread so wide not to mention that the radioactive particles stay big enough that they won't get very far (again the lack of vaporization).
Unless the bomb-builder would get a massive amount (over a ton) of spent reactor fuel on his hands the radioactivity caused by the bomb would not get even as high as it was in Kiev after Chernobyl - even at the explosion site - and last time I checked people were still living there. Dirty bomb is mostly psychological weapon because the panic it would cause would not be in any scale with the actual danger (above post is a good example). Mostly this is due the overreaction in people and media to anything that is connected to radioactivity.
-
What it takes to build a dirty bomb that makes a difference in the means of radiation (thats what youre scared right?).
1. Material thats highly radioactive (hafing time of few days) and vaporizes in lets say, 1000c temperature.
(There aint none.)
2.Tons of TNT (i really mean 1000:s of kg:s).
3.Successifull detonation, which would not just say Boom, but would vaporize all that (non-existent) radioactive material, not just throw it few blocks away. The vaporized material would be required to form a cloud high in the skies, which would then rain allover the city.
It would be easier to buil a regular nuclear bomb, or simply put that TNT allover the country in the bases of skyscrapers. Each one would come down with 100 Kg:s.:eek:
-
Sikboy, we don't know whether Iraq has Nukes or not. They have, or were trying to, purchase material to make "nuclear reactors" or something to that effect... when they don't even need a nuclear power station.
Russia may not have sold nukes, but I remember hearing that they lost several briefcase nukes a while back. And when their government changed who knows what got lost, or "misplaced" in the shuffle.
I never said anything about all Mid East countries having nukes, I asked... of course, if you continue to take quotes out of context then it's a moot point because you will be arguing with something I didn't even say.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKSWulfe
Sikboy, we don't know whether Iraq has Nukes or not. They have, or were trying to, purchase material to make "nuclear reactors" or something to that effect... when they don't even need a nuclear power station.
Yes, they have in the past, and most likely still have today a nuclear weapons program.
Russia may not have sold nukes, but I remember hearing that they lost several briefcase nukes a while back. And when their government changed who knows what got lost, or "misplaced" in the shuffle.
I remember this, but IIRC there was never any substantial evidence to support the report.
I never said anything about all Mid East countries having nukes, I asked... of course, if you continue to take quotes out of context then it's a moot point because you will be arguing with something I didn't even say.
I'm not taking the quote out of context. Our whole sidebar here is on how easy it is to get a functioning nuclear warhead. Your statement:
How many mid east countries have nukes they didn't purchase off the black market anyway?
implies that countries do have nukes that they purchased off the black market, when in fact there is no evidence that any exist. My statement is contextual because it helps to show how rare nuclear warheads are (in a proliferation sense, not a sheer number sense). I have not taken anything out of context, and I continue to argue only that it is very hard to get a nuclear warhead.
However, I do agree, and agree strongly that the threat of "loose nukes" from Russia is very real. The US government is going to great lenghts to help fight this potential problem. Here's a good summary (http://www.ransac.org/new-web-site/fastfacts/overview_security_programs.html) of what we are doing. However, it's not as if anyone with a few million dollars lying around can just go out and buy one on the black market, as you were suggesting.
-Sikboy
-
Here is a good summary of the "Suitecase" bomb story (http://nuketesting.enviroweb.org/hew/News/Lebedbomb.html)
-Sikboy
-
I do believe with the right amount of cash, whoever can get whatever they want or need as the Almighty $$$ is somes only Savior in this world today.
Extremists have already put one together before.
Read this article this morning:
Patrick Goodenough, CNSNews.com
Tuesday, June 11, 2002
Terrorists armed with "dirty bombs" might not be able to cause the devastation of a World Trade Center collapse, but they could trigger unprecedented panic, at enormous economic cost.
Experts with Jane's, the defense publication group, say the detonation of a "dirty bomb" -- conventional explosives packed with highly radioactive material -- in an urban area could have "catastrophic" results.
An entire suburb of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, had to be evacuated in the early 1990s because of a radiation leak from a broken X-ray tube, according to a Jane's Sentinel Security Assessment report.
"A similar catastrophe in New York, London, Paris or Berlin could have major financial repercussions as well as a high human cost," it said.
"The longer-term effects could leave municipal areas uninhabitable for years and give rise to cancers and hereditary defects."
The Pentagon announced Monday that a suspected terrorist, Abdullah al-Mujahir, was arrested last month as he returned to the U.S. after receiving explosive training from Osama bin Laden's group.
Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz said the man, who used to be known as Jose Padilla, was tasked to look for targets in the U.S. for a possible "dirty bomb" attack.
Jane's assessment of the potential effects of a "dirty bomb" terrorist strike echoes that of the global nuclear watchdog, International Atomic Energy Agency.
The IAEA's Abel Gonzales also sees the most serious implications being psychological and economic, rather than actual loss of life.
Experts generally cite another incident in Brazil when discussing the potential repercussions of a terrorist "dirty bomb" attack.
In 1987, scrap metal thieves stole a capsule of highly-radioactive cesium-137 from an abandoned clinic in the city of Goiania, and handed pieces of it to associates around the city to sell.
Exposure to the radiation contaminated 249 people and cost four lives. Eighty-five houses had to be destroyed, and 125,000 drums of contaminated clothing and other items were collected. More than 110,000 people had to be monitored for possible exposure over the months that followed.
"A dirty bomb exploded in a major city could produce similar effects [to the Goiania incident]," says analyst S. Gopal of the South Asia Analysis Group (SAAG) in India. "While the death toll may not be high, the impact would be great with general panic and demoralization."
In the view of Jane's Terrorism and Security Monitor, "the mere threat of using a radiological weapon is a potent terrorist tactic, particularly in an urban center, given the likely terror induced by anything nuclear."
Similarly, Brig. Gurmeet Kanwal, an Indian Army nuclear issues analyst, sees the potential result as the creation of "a fear psychosis that will add to the paranoia that has already got a deep hold over ordinary people the world over after the September 11 attacks."
And he adds that, depending on the radioactive ingredient used, the device could continue to spread radiation for many years.
Pakistan Concerns
According to the Pentagon, al-Qaeda suspect Abdullah al-Muhajir was arrested on his return from Pakistan.
Security analysts in South Asia and elsewhere point to Pakistan as a key potential source for the type of radioactive material necessary to make an effective "dirty bomb," also known as a radiological dispersal device.
Gopal argues that Pakistan's own nuclear program was born out of nuclear espionage and smuggling.
"It is therefore not improbable that some Pakistani official or scientist with sympathies for the [Islamic] fundamentalists would be tempted to supply nuclear technology or material."
The Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security has reported that it's not known whether all of the nuclear-grade material in Pakistan's possession has been used in actual nuclear weapons.
There is a possibility, it says, that some remains unused and unless properly secured, could be vulnerable to theft by those motivated either by profit or ideology.
Bin Laden is strongly suspected of wanting to acquire non-conventional weaponry.
Last October, a leading Indian newspaper reported that customs officials earlier in 2001 confiscated ten packages of unspecified radioactive material on the Kazakhstan-Uzbekistan border. The report said they were bound southward for Quetta in Pakistan, and al-Qaeda was suspected to be the intended recipient.
Dr. Rajesh Kumar Mishra, another SAAG analyst, recalls that testimony during the trial of terrorists involved in the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in East Africa pointed to efforts by al-Qaeda to acquire radioactive material as early in 1993.
Sudanese witness Jamal Ahmet Al-Fadl, a former close bin Laden aide, told the Manhattan court he had been approached back then by an al-Qaeda representative about the possibility of buying uranium from Sudan. Al-Fadl could not confirm whether the material had actually been bought.
Common Sources
But the major concern about "dirty bombs" is that they do not necessarily need highly-sensitive materials like enriched uranium or plutonium.
According to the IAEA, the required material could be stolen from low-security institutions like hospitals, laboratories or universities.
"The number of radioactive sources around the world is vast," it says, and include substances used in cancer radiotherapy treatment, for food preservation and in industry, for example for checking structural quality.
"Security of radioactive materials has traditionally been relatively light," says the IAEA's Gonzalez.
"An undetermined number of radioactive sources have become orphaned of regulatory control and their location is unknown."
According to a Stimson Center report, the most prominent case of nuclear terrorism occurred in 1995, when Chechen separatists marked the first anniversary of the beginning of their conflict with Russia by placing a "dirty bomb" in a popular Moscow park.
The device, which contained cesium-137 -- the same isotope that triggered the 1987 contamination panic in Brazil -- was recovered before detonation and rendered harmless.
Copyright CNSNews.com
-
Well I wasn't suggesting the black market, I was thinking a little money to the right people would get yourself a nuke.
Whether this would be a 1 day "wham bam thankya mam" kinda deal, or several years and a lotta money.. I dunno.
Aren't U.N. inspectors still not allowed into Iraq? There were a bunch of facilities closed off that UN inspectors couldn't enter until later... who knows what was in there- you are right about chem & bio weapons... so maybe that's all they had in those areas... but again, no one really knows except Sadam. We really don't know much about Iraq.
I heard, of course it could of been simply rumors, that there were a few countires in the mid-east that had purchased nukes off the black market.. or perhaps it was just that they were attempting too. I dunno, but the prospect that there could be nukes on the black market is pretty scary...
It's hard to get nukes from other countries, you're right.. very damn hard. Well, except Iraq *IF* they have any.. I'm sure Sadam would give OBL or any terrorist group a "helping hand" if they had the dough.
When I implied they could just go out and purchase one, I didn't mean it like going out to pick up a video game or something.. I meant more along the lines of... well to put this into a better perspective.. trying to purchase illegal/rare drugs in the states. It'd be quite difficult if you didn't know off the bat who to go to... but as time goes on and you search and dig... it's pretty much guaranteed you'll eventually come up with what you want.
I believe this could be the case here. Again, I'm not looking at this as a short term thing... it could be.. but I was thinking more like several years to acquire a nuke, then it would just be a matter of shipping it and getting shipping documents for the "cargo" etc...
Then again, I dunno... only our intelligence agencies really know.. and what they know we don't know... and they may not know it all. :)
-SW