Is a nuclear attack on U.S. soil inevitable?

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by Darth Fierce, Jun 3, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DarthNut Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 1, 1999
    star 6
    If anyone's read the book "The Sum of all Fears", then you know how easy it is for terrorists to send a nuke in a box and into a major port. And this can happen in real life. In the book, (not the movie) the bomb is set off in Denver, south Denver to be exact and pretty much of all south Denver was gone. However, it was a relativly low yield weapon, and I think the rest of the city was undamaged, except of course for radiation. Now, in the movie Baltimore got even less damage, it seems. Also, the winds blew to the northeast, which is scary for me, since I live practically straight northeast of Baltimore, in Toms River, NJ. Sure, I'm proabably around 100 miles away, but this will be no problem for the wind.

    DarthNut,
    the nuttiest guy around.
    Go Nets Go! Lakers suck!

  2. Vaderbait Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 26, 2001
    star 6
    Nuclear attack is no longer inevitable now that the ABM treaty expired. They've already begun testing missile defense programs and now I feel the only way for us to be attacked is to somehow sneak a nuclear bomb (not missile) into the US and detonate it here, which would be a helluva lot harder than launching one.
  3. Maveric Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 17, 1999
    star 4
    Also in the book, it was a nuclear fission device, not fusion. The terrorists made the mistake of killing their scientist who was building it prior to its completion.

    And it was at the Super Bowl in Denver. Scary, huh?
  4. DarthNut Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 1, 1999
    star 6
    "The terrorists made the mistake of killing their scientist who was building it prior to its completion." How was this a mistake? They wanted to prevent leaks, and though I didn't want them to do it, they did it. There were too many people involved, and they had to cover their tracks.


    DarthNut,
    the nuttiest guy around.
  5. Maveric Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 17, 1999
    star 4
    Because they wanted a a nuclear FUSION device and killed the guy prior to his completion of it, therefore the bomb did not have the terrorist's desired effect and produced a far smaller yield.
  6. DarthNut Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 1, 1999
    star 6
    Perhaps they could've delayed the killing of all the workers, but, I think it was crucial for them to eventually kill them all. I think they just killed them too early.

    DarthNut,
    the nuttiest guy around.
  7. PowerfulJedi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 17, 2000
    star 4
    The thing that pisses me off is that they held the Super Bowl in Denver!! j/k Anyway one thing that makes me mad is that in the book the terrorists were middle eastern but in the movie they were neo-nazis. It really makes me mad that Hollywood has gone THAT PC. Anyway who said they have to be IN the country who said that if they blew it up say a couple miles off the coast that it wouldn't do damage? I mean they don't care if they die.
  8. Jedi_Kitiara Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jul 4, 2002
    star 1
    everyone says 'the bomb might explode there and in since i live here it would either catch me during the blast or after.'that could be true.and it is not a pleasant thing to think about.*shudder*but if it is going to happen it's going to happen.worrying about it is not going to solve anything.one of the best ways to win a war is to get the other side completly scared out of their minds.thinking "oh no i can not defeat this enemy they are to strong for me."and things like that.or "they could strike at anytime and it might prove fatal for me or someone else."that is true but,...Don't let it ruin your day!{sarcasm} the truth as everyone knows is that we are all eventually going to die{thru old age,disease,war,famine,ect.}but u can't let it effect u.that might sound stupid or mean.And we probably have different view points saying i live in Alaska.but if something happened elsewhere in the U.S. it would still effect me too.almost all my family is in is some other state.I just get annoyed of hearing about people saying that they are so scared that they might die.just like {for the most part}with happiness there is sadness.with life there is death.ect.their are deaths all over the world every day.{also a well known fact}.but do we worry that much about it?i mean truly.we might feel sadness.but do we really try to do that much about it?as Americans we have,for the most part been very lucky.the main reason anyone starves or is homeless is because they do not work hard enough.{that is not always the case,but for many it is}i dont know...right now i'm feeling a little depressed.kinda been reading a lot about this lately.those are my thoughts on the subject.unimportant as they are.i might change them very quickly though saying i'm probably gonna get laughed at for posting this.oh well.
  9. Darth_Omega Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 19, 2002
    star 6
    Not inevitable but the longer the militaries is going to take rounding up the terrorists the higher the chance it will happen.

    The ONLY other country I can see being hit is the UK.

    I don't agree with you. I think Belgium is also a potential target and France as well.

    Belgium (Brussels to be exact) is a target because of the NATO headquarters.

    Paris is also a target because Paris is actually the center of Western Europe.

    If you destroy Paris you will manage to disrupt the airlines of Europe and radiate the most important industry of Europe and capitals as well...

    The radation radius is between 500km - 1000km (if I'm not mistaken, it also have to depend on the weather)

    Not only are London, Brussels and Amsterdam radiated ,perhaps even Berlin and Rome, Madrid is too far and the Pyreans are in the way, samething with Bern

    But they also manage to disrupt the most important industry of west Europe (Rurh area, North-Italy, North-France, Belgium and the Netherlands)

    Resulting a bigger economic crash then 11/9.

    NYC is a target because of the UN headquarters and Manhattan.

    Washington D.C because white house and that sorta stuff

    Both NYC abd D.C are good target because you also going to manage to radiate the entire East Coast. Where most of the big cities are

    How to protect yourself, well it's very simple

    In other to stop the alpha, beta and gamma particles you need an element with an high mass and that won't radiate any particles.

    And that element is Pb - 208

    thanks to the element size it will stop alpha particles (Helium-4) and Beta (an electron).

    Gamma particles are difficult to stop because they travel at the speed of light and it's actually a lightbeam with no mass. So [face_plain]



    Before you guys starts ignoring this message I do know what I'm talking about.

    If I'm wrong in anyway please correct :)
  10. Vaderize03 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Oct 25, 1999
    star 5
    It won't be as easy as everyone thinks. It's easy to panic about such an occurence, but remember a few things:

    1. We're looking-This is the single biggest factor in the struggle to prevent a nuclear attack. We are expecting it. The government has devices that can detect radiation from the air, and even the best shielding does not prevent ALL leak. The small counts that any nuclear weapon leak out can be detected, but of course only if there is reason to believe we know it is there. As far as ports go, we have yet to screen anywhere close to all cargo, but it's coming. Unfortunately, it may take a nuclear attack to get some results in that department.

    2. Deterrence Policy-Unbeknownst to the general public, but knownst to me :D, the Bush cronie-hood has been quietly re-writing nuclear policy in response to the terrorist threat. This policy revamp includes allowances for retaliatory strikes against civilian arab populations in response to nuclear attacks on the US. As awful as this sounds, it is the opinion of certain highly placed members of our government (who will remain nameless) that if Al-Qaeda believes that the worlds muslim countries might suffer devastating consequences as the result of a nuclear attack, they might just refrain from using them. I know this from a government source and I cannot post proof of this; it is unstated policy. A much more likely scenario here is the use of dirty bombs. Easier to use, to assemble, harder to figure out where it came from.

    3. Loss of world-wide condemnation for the war on terrorism-A nuclear attack will probably be just what the doctor ordered to cure the EU and other nations urging restraint of their reluctance to support broader action against Al-Qaeda. The hysteria such an attack generates might just lead to emergency confinement of all arabs in the US, as horrible as THAT would be. Yes, I think that could happen again here.

    A nuclear attack against the US, IMHO, will radically backfire against al-Qaeda, because it will not destroy the entire country, just create a lot of panic, and probably lead to WWIII.

    Just so long as it doesn't happen before ep III :D....

    Peace,

    V-03
  11. CmdrMitthrawnuruodo Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 1, 2000
    star 6
    I want to deny it, but yes it's most likely. NY, LA, or Wash DC the most likely targets.

    Most likely targets but least likely to happen. NEST teams are always watching the major cities. It will be harder for terrorists to smuggle a nuke into DC, LA, or NY.

    No, the terrorists will more likely choose a smaller big city like Jacksonville, FL for example. Big city with lots of people but not considered too important by our thinking. Plus there are at least two or three naval and air stations nearby. So it will have some military significance.
  12. phantom31415 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jan 3, 2002
    star 1
    This link is really cool. You can input a location and type of nuclear explosion, and see the blast damage superimposed on a map.

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/bomb/sfeature/blastmap.html

    It is a little disturbing to me, since I live very close to Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana. :) (BTW, It's the place where Bush landed on 9/11)
  13. Kun2112 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    May 24, 2002
    star 3
    i think that a nuclear attack by a terrorist orginization in inevitable. however, i do not think the device will necessarly be based off the "fat man" design, which is the basis of modern fission devices and the first stage of fusion devices. the science for this paradigm (squeezing an orange)is much more sophisticated than what would be required for a "little boy" method of chain reaction. as opposed to laboriously timing detonations in order to produce the correctly shaped shockwave to compress a core of fissionable material, bringing two sub-critical masses of U235 together, to form a critical mass, with the "gun" design is much less techinically challenging.

    afterall, a 20 megaton blast is not necessary for them to attain their goals (unless of course their goal is the total destruction of NYC), when a 15 kiloton detonation will cause the same reaction in the american public. there will be a brief period of rioting and hoarding (probably caused by 4 - 7% of people in population centers), followed by some of domestic government intervention akin to curfews or "martial law". thusly, it appears to the terrorists that the entire nation is gripped in panic, and no american can leave their house in peace.

    once this happens, the terrorists will assume that america will return to its pre-WWI isolationist stance because of the debaucle that was the vietnam war. -- let me explain this a little more clearly:
    from their point of view, america withdrew from vietnam because a "magical" number of american casualities. since then there has been somialia. less than a platoon of soldiers were killed in a single engagement, and we withdrew shortly thereafter. their socio-cultural interpretations of these events, is that we have a weak stomach and lack resolve; so it stands to reason ( in their minds ) that if you kill that "magic" number of americans, we will withdraw. to someone who does not understand north american/western european cultural/sociological/political dynamics it seems to be the logical conclusion.

    EDIT: changed modifier to clarify point.
  14. SaberGiiett7 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2002
    star 6
    Has anyone every seen The Day After?Its a good movie about a Nuclear Holocaust.Fortunetly its out of date and is centered around the early eighties and the Cold War and we all know that Russia is no longer a legitamete threat.
  15. Kimball_Kinnison Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 28, 2001
    star 6
    Also in the book, it was a nuclear fission device, not fusion. The terrorists made the mistake of killing their scientist who was building it prior to its completion.

    Actually, he completed it as a fusion (thermonuclear) device, but because the tritium he used was so old, it had decayed into a less-volitile isotope, lessening the chance of a fusion reaction.

    Kimball Kinnison
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.