Curmudgeonly & Skeptical presents Boned Jello: Nukes

Monday, August 30, 2010

Nukes

Say Rodge: Should we should cash in the kid's college fund annuities and buy the 168" plasma TV we need? What do you think?

… intelligence reports from various sources say al Qaeda has already smuggled from 7 to 70 nuclear weapons into the country across the Mexican border. American intelligence experts believe the number to be closer to 7 than 70 but admit the threat is very real. (SOURCE)

”

I say go for it.(Do you happen to have Barbara Mikulski's address?)

Rodger the Real King of France 8/30/2010 09:14:00 AM 6 Comments

"If the number of Islamic terror attacks continues at the current rate, candlelight vigils will soon be the number-one cause of global warming. "
Argus Hamilton

6 comments:

pdwalker said...: God forbid one a nuclear device ever gets exploded on American soil by one of those Islamic wackjobs.

What would happen? Would the country sink under a dictatorship? Would the left even notice, or would they immediately apologize? Or would there be a clean sweep of the Augean Stables?; 8/30/10, 11:03 AM
An ignorant dickweed said...: The left would blame George Bush and say this is why the mosque needs to be built.; 8/30/10, 12:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Joshua: "Shall we play a game?"
Whopper: "Love to. How about Global Thermonuclear War?"
.; 8/30/10, 1:33 PM
TimO said...: I'm betting that if Barry doesn't push the little red button, SOMEONE behind him would 'insure' the completion of the code sequence.; 8/30/10, 6:01 PM
Anonymous said...: Supposedly, al Qaeda thinks long term. If they had a long-term plan for obtaining nukes and getting them into the US, why would they wake us up by flying planes into skyscrapers on 9/11? I would think it would be easier to just let us drone on, unsuspecting, rather than poke us in the eye and put us on guard.; 8/30/10, 8:52 PM
Corsair, The Mostly Harmless said...: Sorry, the article lost me at "Suitcase Nukes" with the "unranium and plutonium" kept in separate compartments.

U235 and Pu239 have different fissle rates, and require different physics packages. U235 is quite "safe" for a fissle material, and requires a more "robust" physics package to get a small amount to go into a critical mass. MUCH more than would fit into a "suitcase nuke."

Pu239, on the other hand is among the most toxic substances on Earth. And while you can get a much spaller pit of plutonium to go super critical, the sheilding required to not set off every gamma detector within a country mile, much less give anyone handling the bomb a leathal dose of "glow-in-the-darkness" is again quiet heavey for a so-called "suitcase nuke."

Not buying it. Yet.

I think FAR more likely a threat is a first generation NorK or Iranian A-bomb, or a sold/stolen/"misplaced" Soviet or Pakistani 2nd or 3rd Gen weapon inside a cargo container. Even if it were set off in a major harbor before the container could be scanned, the damage to the economy would be huge.

My $.02; 8/31/10, 9:25 AM

Monday, August 30, 2010

Nukes

6 comments:

Post a Comment