If a Nuke exploded in a major U.S. city,

[Jack Sprat]

assuming it was not launched but components were assembled on site, wouldn't the quick retaliatory strike be off the table. How would anyone know where it originated from? Not a pleasant thought, but in the new real world, I would think future presidents would have to ponder it.

[MisterHowdy]

1. Blame Iran or Venezuela

Thats probably what the current admin. would do.

[GreenPartyVoter]

27. Righto. They'll pick the bad guy that beating one gives them the highest return, like

they did by declaring Iraq was part of 9/11/

[The Straight Story]

2. Which is why MADD is not as powerful in this case - and why we don't want more countries with nukes

the more out there the greater the risk of that occurring, and the less chance we would be able to respond.

Of course, we could always smuggle some of ours into other countries and blow em up. China could do the same, etc. The more countries with them the less likely we are to know who was behind it (except for certain radiological signatures). And even then, if we could tell it was from China it would not mean they did it (could claim it was stolen, etc).

[shadowknows69]

24. Yeah, well I don't even want us to have them

n/t

[karlrschneider]

3. Well, that is a very rhetorical question.

There would obviously be tremendous public pressure to "do something" which is when the Magic Eight Ball would be hauled out to formulate a response.

[originalpckelly]

4. Will the world end today?

Ask again later.

[karlrschneider]

5. "Signs point to Yes"

;-)

[Solon]

6. The nuclear material is traceable...

Weapons Grade Plutonium or Uranium has to be manufactured, enriched from the raw ores and elements. The enrichment facilities, and there are only a few, all leave unique markers in the percentages of isotopes left in the nuclear material. Because of this, within hours of a nuclear blast, a sample of the blast site would be taken, and then the resulting tests set up for comparison with known enrichment sites. Once that's tracked down, assuming the material wasn't stolen, the source country would be a sheet of glass in a day, if that.

Before you ask, all enrichment sites are known, and its hard as hell to hide them in any way. Iran, as an example, isn't hiding anything, not really, for crying out loud, they have to BUY centrifuges to enrich the stuff! How do you hide that, when its all under the eye of the IAEA? In addition to this, it takes a LOT of radioactive material to enrich even a small amount of Plutonium or Uranium to be suitable for a nuclear weapon.

You need a large crew to maintain such sites, in addition to shielding of radioactive material, mostly in the form of concrete(6 ft. thick, minimum), quite a bit of specialist equipment, which would have to be bought from a nuclear power, like Russia, and you also need the raw material itself, which can also be hard to find.

The chances of a nuclear weapon being detonated here is small, detection is the huge problem, just transporting the nuclear material, especially enough to destroy a good sized chunk of a city, would weigh several hundred pounds, and needs to be shielded by lead or concrete. Even then, a 200 dollar Geiger counter could detect it, before its set off. A more sensitive unit could detect such a bomb from a long distance away. Even Satellites can detect such radiation.

Most likely, if such a bomb WERE to be set off, it would most likely be a bomb or material from a bomb that was stolen, either from Russia or the United States, so there would be no place to bomb in retaliation, unless you were suicidal.

[Jack Sprat]

12. The detection reassurances sound good,

and I understand and appreciate the information concerning all that is required in the composition of a nuclear weapon and the difficulty of bringing all the materials together and enrichment of the critical substances. Yet, what do you make of the stories of already assembled suitcase-size bombs that could be smuggled into the country? The radioactive sensors should detect their presence, as you say, even possibly by satellite.

[Solon]

21. There is no such thing as a "Suitcase Bomb"...

At least a bomb an individual person can carry. Nuclear weapons have a minimum size limit, so to speak, past a certain point, nuclear material isn't fissionable, you need so much mass of Plutonium or Uranium for it to actually create a nuclear explosion. Otherwise the chain reaction doesn't take place, and you have what amounts to a "dirty bomb", which isn't nearly as effective.

What you are referring to would actually be called "Trunk Bombs", they weigh several hundred pounds, for the high explosive, electronics, and fissionable material. They would BARELY fit in a good sized sedan's trunk, or, in a pinch, a large chest. Also, another note, the Russians, who developed this size of nuclear weapon have abandoned its development, part of the reason is because the failure rate was atrocious, over 50% of those developed were duds. In addition to this, these bombs have limited range of effect, about 5 to 10 city blocks would be destroyed in such an explosion, and that depends greatly on terrain.

Actually, a good example of this type of weapon would be in that movie "Sum of All Fears", where a nuclear weapon was detonated, by neo-Nazis, in Baltimore, I believe. The weapon was actually quite small, and was able to fit within a vending machine, that was imported into the country through a port. The scenario in question wouldn't have happened, at all, if they had a team of government inspectors that had various detection equipment, including Geiger counters, bomb dogs, etc. Port security is important, and I believe we should beef it up, to reasonable levels, where such threats are minimized.

Of course, that particular scenario was extraordinary, the bomb was manufactured in the United States, sold to the Israelis, and they lost it like 20 years before. It was then found, sold to someone who had terrorist intentions, and was then rebuilt by Russian nuclear engineers into a bomb that could fit in a vending machine.

The point is that threats like this exist, however, we must put them in perspective, most terrorists, including Osama Bin Laden, prefer attacks that WORK, over just thinking of how much damage they could do. This means they would use tried and true methods of attack, and the simplest ones possible, to limit points of failure or detection. Murphy's law applies here, the more elaborate a plan you create, the more likely its going to fail. Think of 9/11 and how terrible that day was, now think about the fact that the ONLY weapon used for the terrorist attack was something you could pick up at ANY hardware store for as little as a dollar, a box cutter.

Not to mention the logistical and organizational problems with using such weapons. Unlike what most people think Al Queda isn't some centralized organization like a mob family. Al Queda itself probably only has an official membership of Osama Bin Laden and a few of his closest associates. Most terrorist organizations of this type are decentralized to the point where each individual cell has no clue what another cell is doing. Its safer this way, less communications that can be intercepted, less likely to be detected, and less likely to get caught.

These terrorists are loose associates of each other, nothing more, nothing less, and so they rarely trade any real information about upcoming terrorist attacks, in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if even Osama Bin Laden isn't aware of many of these attacks. He'll take the credit, obviously, because he's a megalomaniac and insecure, so he needs the attention, but I don't think he directs much myself. Catching him, while a priority, may not put a dent in any terroristic operations. He's a leader in that he provides funding, and he's the inspirational leader for many fanatics and terrorists around the world.

The problem with deploying a nuclear weapon is that it would require some centralized organization, something that even Al Queda hasn't demonstrated it has.

[jmowreader]

35. The utility knife is even more frightening of a weapon than you think

I'm going to tell you something about utility knives that is truly frightening to behold: There is, at this time, NO regulation covering the purchase of large quantities of these knives.

The 9/11 attack was supposedly carried out by 19 men all equipped with utility knives. Assume every terrorist carried three knives--one in his hand, one in his pocket and one in his sock. That's 57 knives total. Round it up to an even sixty. Any Home Depot, any Lowe's, hell even any Ace Hardware in the United States would sell you five dozen utility knives. Just say you've got a crew hanging drywall and you need a whole shitload of knives. Hell, most of us would go up in the overhead and start pulling down boxes of knives so you didn't have big bags full of the things. There is an absolutely legitimate reason for someone to walk in off the street to buy five dozen utility knives. There are twenty or thirty thousand absolutely legitimate reasons for doing it.

OTOH, ammonium nitrate is a different story. Contrary to popular belief, ANFO isn't that potent of an explosive, and it's a bitch to set off--mining companies, who use ANFO a lot because it's cheap, cap it with dynamite. But if you fill a truck with this shit and set it off, especially if you add racing nitromethane like Timothy McVeigh did, you get a very good effect. This is both its Achilles heel and its greatest attribute. You can't go to Home Depot and buy ammonium nitrate. (You can't get castor bean plants there either.) If you want any ammonium nitrate, you must go to a farm supply store--and they know every large-scale ammonium nitrate user in the area, usually by first name. You also can't hijack an airplane with it because no one would load that much of it onto the plane. "John, this footlocker smells like ammonia and jet fuel. Let's not put it on the plane, okay?"

[MadHound]

39. Umm, there are indeed viable suitcase bombs

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suitcase_nuke>

Highly unlikely, I'll grant you, but still possible:shrug:

[Mind_your_head]

15. The problem is that anthrax (and certainly weapons grade anthrax)

is traceable and well, it wasn't 'traced'!!!

System is broken/not cooperating with the peasants, if ya know what I mean. Peasants, like me, aren't happy or willing to be so fooled anymore.

[Solon]

22. It was traced to a U.S. bioweapons lab...

however, the investigation was stalled or halted by the White House. Personally, I think they wanted to avoid the embarrassment of the fact that our security was breached, and that it was a DOMESTIC(Christian) terrorist who made that particular attack.

Basically what I'm saying isn't that the government is competent in this area, it obviously isn't and Bush is to blame for most of that, what I'm saying is IF a nuclear weapon was detonated anywhere in the United States, it would HAVE to be an inside job.

[GreenPartyVoter]

28. We do know that a lot of the former Soviet Union's stuff was not secured

as the country crumbled and dissolved. I think that is my biggest conern right now. The black market stuff.

[Ezlivin]

36. Anthrax can also be traced - now tell me the status of the FBI's investigation

Why wasn't the data from the Flight Data Recorders recovered in NY after 9/11 ever released?

Why was the steel quickly carted away and not analyzed (even after the FBI hypothesized that car/truck bombs had gone off in the basements)?

Why was the footage from nearly 70 cameras pointed at or located near the Pentagon confiscated after 9/11?

Why was the footage from video cameras near the Murrah Building in OKC confiscated and never released?

Why was this Rider truck parked in an Army compound before the bombing?

[Richard D]

7. Obviously . . .

. . . They will blame whoever they want to attack.

[Solo_in_MD]

8. There would be some trace left

not like a car bomb, but the design and possibly the source of the material could be determined.

Wasn't this part of a Clancy book a while back?

[eagler]

9. Even pondering such a thought is scary.

All dissension would cease immediately. It would be total war with all perceived enemies probably.

[CoffeeCat]

10. Exactly...

...any sort of nuclear event would be used as the springboard
to launch war against any country(ies) the neocons want to own.

BushCo could build a case for war against ANY country, with
their bullshit marketing machine and a gullible US citizenry.

I bet this administration could make a successful argument
for war against Canada, if they wanted.

[BushOut06]

13. All dissension would cease? In what world?

For sake of argument, let's say a nuke went off this year, while * is still in power. * decides somehow that Iran is to blame. Are you saying that all of us on DU would just "rally 'round the President" and support the annihilation of Iran? I would like to think that the more reasoned and logical among us would DEMAND some sort of thorough bipartisan investigation first, to determine EXACTLY where the nuke came from. Of course, there's the also the possibility of a "false flag" operation, or a nuke set off by a 3rd party knowing full well that we would likely suspect Iran. The way things are going in this country, I don't think that there would be any investigation whatsoever. We'd simply attack Iran, and most Americans would go along with it.

[eagler]

25. What I'm saying is that we would all probably wake up in

a new world. Marshal law would rule, dissent would not be tolerated by the military police, and probably any suspect groups would be immediately "detained" INDEFINITELY. There's no doubt in my mind that will happen in the event of a nuclear attack.

[ShortnFiery]

30. IMO Bullshit! The people will DEMAND that we have competent leadership.

We are not the sheep that the media likes to consider us. The American People will be pissed as hell AT THE UNITARY EXECUTIVE for allowing this to happen.

They've played out all the fear mongering and know it.

[eagler]

34. I hope we never have to find out. But do you you remember Gitmo

and just for some reason there are empty prisons being kept up all over this country for. There's one 2 miles from my home. There will be dissent but I think it will be put down by force. Let me point out that I don't favor any of this but I do think it will happen if we are attacked in that manner and only in that manner and there won't be much anyone can do about it.

[Cabcere]

11. Is it sad that my first thought on reading that subject line was

"then Bill O'Reilly would be happy"? :( Assuming the city was San Francisco, of course. :scared: Man, that's awfully cynical, even for me.

[krispos42]

14. They might be able to tell who made it from the radioactive residue

Exact proportions of trace nuclear material, housing components, that sort of thing.

IIRC that was how the DoD figured out the nuke that was used on Denver was made from US nuclear material stolen by Israel.

I assume that we work very hard at making sure we know the exact compositions of the nuclear and casing materials for all the nuclear bombs in the world.

[sammythecat]

16. It would take time to finger a culprit

Days, maybe weeks. Who knows, but in the meantime there'd be a real chance of total chaos across the country if a city was devastated.

People in every big city would wonder if more bombs were set to go off. I'd be thinking that maybe it's time to get the hell outta Dodge. I'll bet there'd be millions of others thinking the same thing.

[HuffleClaw]

17. THIS administration would 'retaliate' against its 'enemies' immediately

claiming they were 'responsible' and a VERY large portion of the public would cheer them on in a literal blind rage.

[lutefisk]

20. Yes. They are just waiting for their third "Pearl Harbour"

I have no confidence that this government will EVER respond appropriately to any crisis. Just looking at the facts and the history of the past seven years.

[murloc]

18. They can certainly trace the origin of the fissible material.

Right down to the factory that made it.... or so I hear.

Other clues may also be gathered about the rest of the device from its yield and other characteristics.

Having said that, pinning it with certainity on a specific group or country could be quite problematic, and if you could, revealing the methods of doing so would proably compromise national secrets.

Nonetheless, if such a terrible thing occurred, SOMEBODY would be made to pay as a matter of politics...even if that somebody is 100% innocent.

[Mind_your_head]

19. Spot on!!!

Welcome to DU, murloc. :-)

[LeftishBrit]

23. If it happened right now, the American government would probably blame and bomb Iran or North Korea

Though I suspect (without having a great knowledge of nukes) that one could work out where the components came from.

In any case, once this happened, it would mean the end of the world as a place inhabitable by humans. The only question would be how prolonged and painful the end would be.

[Faux pas]

26. sitting under my tinfoil hat, i'd suspect our government. what

better way to get our attention and keep us in line?

[ShortnFiery]

29. IMO, It won't work.

Once the populace is so brutally shaken out of their "learned helplessness" depression, they are going to emerge *with great anger.*

Nope, a black flag operation is not "a smart move" because the "9/11 fear the evil terrorist under your bed" memes have been overplayed.

You can BURN OUT from fear mongering. IMO the American Populace has reached that point.

An major terrorist attack can not help the credibility of this played-out and criminal Executive Branch.

If anything else, the populace will DEMAND that Congress start doing their damn jobs and not turn the country over to the clueless Unitary Executive.

[OnceUponTimeOnTheNet]

31. I'm not so sure it wouldn't work~ The WH has the MSM in pocket

Seems to me that the populace still has their collective heads up their asses. Comfortably so.
They'll just continue to watch the MSM and bleat and repeat whatever the media says is 'Truth'.

The burn-outs would be the online news junkies like us.

[ShortnFiery]

32. I still have faith in many Good Americans ... I still have hope that

we won't lay down for totalitarianism without a good fight. :shrug:

[OnceUponTimeOnTheNet]

33. Faith is good ~ but too many Americans still trust in the bOObtube MSM. nt

[Faux pas]

38. It shouldn't work for those of us who have a brain, what about all

the sheep(le) out here who still believe everything the government wants them to? I think they out number the actual thinkers by a big percentage.

[WinkyDink]

37. I find the premise risible.