Author Topic: US Policy on Weapons of Mass Destruction  (Read 1017 times)

Offline Hangtime

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10148
US Policy on Weapons of Mass Destruction
« Reply #15 on: October 12, 2001, 02:52:00 PM »
Quote
In Englewood, Colorado, four postal workers were taken to Swedish Medical Center after being exposed to powder that fell from a package at the Parker Post Office, 20 miles south of Denver, a hospital spokeswoman said. The workers entered the hospital's emergency room, where they were being tested for possible exposure to anthrax, the spokeswoman said. As a precaution, the hospital and the post office were sealed at 10:25 a.m. (12:25 p.m. EDT), she added.

 

ruh roh.
The price of Freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle, anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness...

...at home, or abroad.

Offline Ripsnort

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27251
US Policy on Weapons of Mass Destruction
« Reply #16 on: October 12, 2001, 03:00:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Hangtime:


ruh roh.

Yeah, probably a Baby-shower gift with talcom powder in it...Gian, a co-worker, used to work in a mail room, she said you guys wouldn't BELIEVE what gets sent thru the mail, and most of it much more dangerous than Anthrax (I think she was referring to the DNC publications! :P

[ 10-12-2001: Message edited by: Ripsnort ]

Offline Hangtime

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10148
US Policy on Weapons of Mass Destruction
« Reply #17 on: October 12, 2001, 03:04:00 PM »
Rip, you tweak my intrest.

WHAT '50 missing' suitcase nukes?

Your source?

The makers.. designers, production people.. who where they.. are they alive and available for comment?

If it is in fact a real deal; Who violated '4th protocol' agreements by ordering design and construction?

In short, is this a 'chicken little' howl??
The price of Freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle, anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness...

...at home, or abroad.

Offline funkedup

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9466
      • http://www.raf303.org/
US Policy on Weapons of Mass Destruction
« Reply #18 on: October 12, 2001, 03:19:00 PM »
Maybe this is what Rip is thinking about: http://www.fas.org/nuke/hew/News/Lebedbomb.html

Closest things the US had to a suitcase bomb were artillery shells and portable bombs that were about the size of a pony keg.

BTW this stuff was developed in my hometown.   :)  :(   :eek:

[ 10-12-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]

Offline Tac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4085
US Policy on Weapons of Mass Destruction
« Reply #19 on: October 12, 2001, 04:49:00 PM »
"Our policy has always been to use conventional weapons until we are losing, then use tactical nukes until we are losing. Then we blow up the world"

-from an Ex-NATO chief

(Wish I remembered his name. Think 1990..)

Offline ispar

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 383
      • http://None :-)
US Policy on Weapons of Mass Destruction
« Reply #20 on: October 12, 2001, 08:38:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Ripsnort:
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/33790.htm

Read to educate yourselfs

Its my opinion that one of the 50 missing nuclear suit case bombs is much more of a threat than Anthrax. Wife says Anthrax is the least of their (health care) workers worries, Small pox is the #1 worry (Not enough vaccine, those that are vacinated are only good for 5 yrs, most born before 1975 have NOT been vaccinated for small pox, and its VERY contagious thru the air)

The last known example of small pox was destroyed in 1998... or was this bubonic plague? In any case, that doesn't mean it's gone, of course. It's hard (read: impossible) to elimate a virus. But is it really such a threat?

Offline Gadfly

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1364
US Policy on Weapons of Mass Destruction
« Reply #21 on: October 13, 2001, 12:29:00 AM »
In the early eighties, I worked on a toxicology laboratory for a company.  It was a small(20,00sqft) facility, and not graded for the level of Anthrax research, much less smallpox.  It cost 150$ million then.  A decent lab with a chance of this type of research(not production) would cost about 2 Billion dollars today.

Playing with these things is very risky, and if less than the required(see above) protocols and equipment are used, not only will you and your workers die, but it will be very easy locate your facility.

Baby nukes and suicidal maniacs scare me, not bugs.

Offline easymo

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1640
US Policy on Weapons of Mass Destruction
« Reply #22 on: October 13, 2001, 02:14:00 AM »
Boil that dust speck! Boil that dust speck!

                  ------ From Horten Hears a Who.

Offline Tumor

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4272
      • Wait For It
US Policy on Weapons of Mass Destruction
« Reply #23 on: October 13, 2001, 02:55:00 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by ispar:


The last known example of small pox was destroyed in 1998... or was this bubonic plague? In any case, that doesn't mean it's gone, of course. It's hard (read: impossible) to elimate a virus. But is it really such a threat?

Ispar, it was smallpox, although the date I think is up in the air, I heard 1976.  The threat lies with the stuff they've kept in little vials in labs.  The stuff still exists, count on it.  If the terrorists have it, who knows.

IMO, the Terrorists threw the best of "what they had" at us on 9/11.  I could be wrong of course, but I firmly believe that IF the terrorists had a suitcase nuke, it would have gone off by now.  Also, I didn't read up that much on the FAS website, but I would imagine those suitcase nukes are relatively low yeild devices...sure, devastating but limited none the less.  These are definately not the caliber of weapons that you find on Russian/Chinease ICBM's...those baby's take out entire cities, big chunks of States etc, tac type nukes are meant to do things like, knock out airfields.

I'm quietly thinking ole Osama may be dead as we speak...dunno if thats good or bad but, he can't hide from our weapons...if we find or found WHICH cave his cowardly little bellybutton was in he was/is as good as ham...scorched hamburger.

Tumor
"Dogfighting is useless"  :Erich Hartmann

Offline Dinger

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1705
US Policy on Weapons of Mass Destruction
« Reply #24 on: October 13, 2001, 07:14:00 PM »
Bahhhh... I give massive terrorist networks more credit than that.  If they were gonna deliver Anthrax, come on, would they target Tom Brokaw and the Enquirer?  And would they have such poor timing?

Offline LtHans

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 366
US Policy on Weapons of Mass Destruction
« Reply #25 on: October 13, 2001, 08:50:00 PM »
Quote
And would they have such poor timing?

What the...?  "Poor" timing?  Right not terrorism is the only news story on the whole planet.  The good news is the hightened sense of awareness and rediness to beleave it that is making defending against it easier.  Plus the concept of using crop dusters to deliver it.

I personally hope that the idjits who made it screw up and release it on their own people.  That will show these morons that it's really more dangerous to them than it is to the most medically advanced nation on the planet (we've got three men walking around with artificial hearts as we speak).  Thats the one thought thats helping me right now.

Hans.

Offline StSanta

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2496
US Policy on Weapons of Mass Destruction
« Reply #26 on: October 14, 2001, 03:35:00 AM »
My joystick will arrive next week, from the US.

Of course, it'll be anthrax infected.

 :D

Offline Dinger

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1705
US Policy on Weapons of Mass Destruction
« Reply #27 on: October 14, 2001, 11:30:00 AM »
What I meant by poor timing is this:
These are the folks who managed to crash three planes into buildings before the system reacted.
Why would they then send Anthrax in so few letters that arrive at such wide intervals?  If you want maximum effect from such a weak delivery system, you send a bunch of letters at the same time, so more than one person dies.

Offline funkedup

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9466
      • http://www.raf303.org/
US Policy on Weapons of Mass Destruction
« Reply #28 on: October 15, 2001, 08:58:00 PM »
I don't know, ask the terrorists.  Because this is not just a coincidence.

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12772
US Policy on Weapons of Mass Destruction
« Reply #29 on: October 15, 2001, 09:23:00 PM »
We may have to dust off those nukes before this is all over. This whole mess could come down to us or them (whoever them is). I hope we choose us.
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.